Re: Performance monitor

At 18:05 7/03/01 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> All in all, I do not see this as an easy task that you can whip out and
>> then release as a 7.1 patch without extensive testing.  And given that,
>> I'd rather see it done with what I consider the right long-term approach,
>> rather than a dead-end hack.  I think doing it in a signal handler is
>> ultimately going to be a dead-end hack.
>
>Well, the signal stuff will get me going at least.

Didn't someone say this can't be done safely - or am I missing something?

ISTM that doing the work to put things in shared memory will be much more
profitable in the long run. You have previously advocated self-tuning
algorithms for performance - a prerequisite for these will be performance
data in shared memory.


----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner                    |     __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd.   |----/       -  \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498)          |          /(@)   ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81         |                 _________  \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82         |                 ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au          |                /           \|                                |    --________--
PGP key available upon request,  |  /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371   |/