Re: auto_explain WAS: RFC: Timing Events

From: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: auto_explain WAS: RFC: Timing Events
Date: 2012-11-08 01:05:02
Message-ID: CAMkU=1xGZuMbu4vhnmcFFZh7nz=4Z8rkYgq3b__=ecodHXCN=w@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 4:55 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> What prevents you from doing so? The performance impact? The volume
>> of logs generated?
>
> Yes and yes.

I've never noticed a performance impact, unless you are having it
analyze, or having it log every query. How do you measure the impact?

For the log volume, would it help if there was some "unexpectedness"
threshold? That is, if a statement exceeds the duration threshold, it
gets explained, But then it only gets logged if the actual duration
divided by the cost estimate exceeds some threshold.

Cheers,

Jeff

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2012-11-08 02:17:29 Further pg_upgrade analysis for many tables
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2012-11-08 00:55:02 Re: auto_explain WAS: RFC: Timing Events