| 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: | 2018-10-29 01:20:49 |
| Message-ID: | 8E9126CB6CE2CD42962059AB0FBF7B0DC5A0B3@g01jpexmbkw23 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 8:22 PM, Yotsunaga Naoki wrote:
Hi, I understood and thought of your statistic comment once again. In the case of sampling, is there enough statistic to investigate?
In the case of a long SQL, I think that it is possible to obtain a sufficient sampling number.
However, in the case of about 1 minute of SQL, only 60 samples can be obtained at most.
#Because legard’s comment.
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1539158356795-0.post%40n3.nabble.com
Does this sampling number of 60 give information that I really want?
Perhaps it is not to miss the real problem part?
---------------------------------------
Naoki, Yotsunaga.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-10-29 03:33:51 | Re: [PATCH] Tab complete EXECUTE FUNCTION for CREATE (EVENT) TRIGGER |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2018-10-29 01:16:03 | Re: [HACKERS] Transactions involving multiple postgres foreign servers, take 2 |