Re: Buffer usage in EXPLAIN and pg_stat_statements (review)
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Buffer usage in EXPLAIN and pg_stat_statements (review) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 12414.1255528608@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Buffer usage in EXPLAIN and pg_stat_statements (review) (Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: Buffer usage in EXPLAIN and pg_stat_statements (review)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki.takahiro@oss.ntt.co.jp> writes: > Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> 2. I do not understand the stuff with propagating counts into the top >> instrumentation node. > It is required by contrib/pg_stat_statements. EXPLAIN wants per-node > accumulation, but pg_stat_statements wants the total number. Well, you need to find another way or risk getting the patch rejected altogether. Those global variables are the weakest part of the whole design, and I'm not going to commit a patch that destabilizes the entire system for the sake of a debatable "requirement" of a contrib module. If you went with the alternative definition I suggested (don't reset the static counters, so that every node includes its children's counts) then the behavior you want would fall out automatically. Or, at the price of running both resettable and non-resettable static counters, you could have pg_stat_statements obtain totals that are independent of any particular instrumentation node. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: