Re: New SQL counter statistics view (pg_stat_sql)
От | Gavin Flower |
---|---|
Тема | Re: New SQL counter statistics view (pg_stat_sql) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | f0f425c5-05da-6995-18c6-b7e2c64f6157@archidevsys.co.nz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: New SQL counter statistics view (pg_stat_sql) (neha khatri <nehakhatri5@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: New SQL counter statistics view (pg_stat_sql)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 24/08/16 12:02, neha khatri wrote: > >Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de <mailto:andres@anarazel.de>> writes: > >> On 2016-08-22 13:54:43 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 11:17 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us > <mailto:tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>> wrote: > >>>> I'm inclined to suggest you forget this approach and propose a single > >>>> counter for "SQL commands executed", which avoids all of the above > >>>> definitional problems. People who need more detail than that are > >>>> probably best advised to look to contrib/pg_stat_statements, anyway. > > >>> I disagree. I think SQL commands executed, lumping absolutely > >>> everything together, really isn't much use. > > >> I'm inclined to agree. I think that's a quite useful stat when looking > >> at an installation one previously didn't have a lot of interaction > with. > > >Well, let's at least have an "other" category so you can add up the > >counters and get a meaningful total. > > How would that meaningful total might help a user. What can a user > might analyse with the counter in 'other' category. > > > Neha > The user could then judge if there were a significant number of examples not covered in the other categories - this may, or may not, be a problem; depending on the use case. Cheers, Gavin
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: