Re: Wait events monitoring future development - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: Wait events monitoring future development
Date
Msg-id 20160808170341.GC16416@momjian.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Wait events monitoring future development  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Wait events monitoring future development  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Re: Wait events monitoring future development  (Ilya Kosmodemiansky <ilya.kosmodemiansky@postgresql-consulting.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Aug  8, 2016 at 04:43:40PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >    According to developers, overhead is small, but many people have doubts
> > that it can be much more significant for intensive workloads. Obviously, it
> > is not an easy task to test, because you need to put doubtfully
> > non-production ready code into mission-critical production for such tests.
> >    As a result it will be clear if this design should be abandoned  and we
> > need to think about less-invasive solutions or this design is acceptable.
> >
> 
> I think here main objection was that gettimeofday can cause
> performance regression which can be taken care by using configurable
> knob.  I am not aware if any other part of the design has been
> discussed in detail to conclude whether it has any obvious problem.

It seems asking users to run pg_test_timing before deploying to check
the overhead would be sufficient.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+                     Ancient Roman grave inscription +



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Vik Fearing
Date:
Subject: Re: No longer possible to query catalogs for index capabilities?
Next
From: Vik Fearing
Date:
Subject: Re: Surprising behaviour of \set AUTOCOMMIT ON