Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: stats_block_level

From: Erik Jones <erik(at)myemma(dot)com>
To: Jim Nasby <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hatcher Kimberly <kim(at)myemma(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: stats_block_level
Date: 2007-07-29 06:24:50
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Jul 27, 2007, at 6:45 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:

> On Jul 26, 2007, at 2:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So maybe the *real* question to ask is why we have separate GUCs for
>> stats_row_level and stats_block_level.  Shouldn't we fold them into a
>> single switch?  It's hard to see what having just one of them  
>> turned on
>> will save.
> IIRC, the guys at Emma have seen a performance difference with  
> stats_block_level off and row_level on, presumable due in part to  
> having 150k tables.
> Erik? Kim?

Well, we turned it off at the same time we moved from 8.2.3 to 8.2.4  
so the actual culprit may have been what prompted the stats collector  
improvement that went into that release.  I could test turning it  
back on this week if you like -- I certainly would like to have my  
blks_read/cach_hits stats back.  Toggling stats_block_level will  
respond to a reload, yes?

Software Developer | Emma®
800.595.4401 or 615.292.5888
615.292.0777 (fax)

Emma helps organizations everywhere communicate & market in style.
Visit us online at

In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2007-07-29 12:46:08
Subject: pipe chunking vs Windows
Previous:From: David FuhryDate: 2007-07-28 16:55:34
Subject: Re: New Index

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group