Re: That EXPLAIN ANALYZE patch still needs work
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: That EXPLAIN ANALYZE patch still needs work |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 17395.1149714323@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: That EXPLAIN ANALYZE patch still needs work ("Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: That EXPLAIN ANALYZE patch still needs work
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com> writes: > On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 11:34:30AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> timer interrupt routine does this once every few milliseconds: > One issue is that on very fast queries, you'd get absolutely no data > this way. Yeah. Of course, on "very fast" queries you don't get very good data from the existing method either --- with a machine fast enough to have sub-microsecond plan node execution times, the accuracy of gettimeofday really isn't good enough. The other thing that was bothering me was whether disk I/O might be undercounted by an interrupt-driven method. I kinda doubt that any kernel will save up N interrupts that occur while the process is blocked on a slow read() ... you'll probably get only one. So the whole idea may be unworkable. At the moment I think we need to revert the recent patch and go back to the drawing board. Improving on the original implementation of EXPLAIN ANALYZE is clearly not as easy as it looks. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: