Re: Performance monitor signal handler
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Performance monitor signal handler |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1325.984847702@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Performance monitor signal handler (Samuel Sieb <samuel@sieb.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Performance monitor signal handler
Re: Performance monitor signal handler |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Samuel Sieb <samuel@sieb.net> writes: > Just as another suggestion, what about sending the data to a different > computer, so instead of tying up the database server with processing the > statistics, you have another computer that has some free time to do the > processing. > Some drawbacks are that you can't automatically start/restart it from the > postmaster and it will put a little more load on the network, ... and a lot more load on the CPU. Same-machine "network" connections are much cheaper (on most kernels, anyway) than real network connections. I think all of this discussion is vast overkill. No one has yet demonstrated that it's not sufficient to have *one* collector process and a lossy transmission method. Let's try that first, and if it really proves to be unworkable then we can get out the lily-gilding equipment. But there is tons more stuff to do before we have useful stats at all, and I don't think that this aspect is the most critical part of the problem. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: