RE: [Proposal] Add accumulated statistics for wait event

From: "Yotsunaga, Naoki" <yotsunaga(dot)naoki(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>
To: 'Phil Florent' <philflorent(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: [Proposal] Add accumulated statistics for wait event
Date: 2018-10-05 08:21:47
Message-ID: 8E9126CB6CE2CD42962059AB0FBF7B0DC46829@g01jpexmbkw23
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 0:54 AM, Phil Florent wrote:

Phil, Michael, I appreciate your polite comments.
I understand as follows.
We can find it if we shorten the sampling interval, but a lot of information comes out.
# The balance is important.
Also, it is not good unless we have enough samples.
And I have to do various other things.
Is my understand correct?

It seems to me that it is difficult for me if my understanding is right.
Is DBA really able to solve bottlenecks with sampling?
# Since I am a beginner, I feel that way. And other people may not feel it difficult.

What I would like to say is that if we have information on the number of wait events and the wait time(like other DB), we can investigate more easily.
Of course, I understand that it also affects performance. So, I suggest a way that it can switch on and off, defaults is off.

Naoki, Yotsunaga.

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kyotaro HORIGUCHI 2018-10-05 08:30:17 Re: shared-memory based stats collector
Previous Message Daniel Gustafsson 2018-10-05 08:11:45 Re: [HACKERS] Optional message to user when terminating/cancelling backend