On 15 May 2014 at 19:56, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 06:58:11PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > A recent question from Tim Kane prompted me to measure the overhead > costs of EXPLAIN ANALYZE, which I'd not checked in awhile. Things > are far worse than I thought. On my current server (by no means > lavish hardware: Xeon E5-2609 @2.40GHz) a simple seqscan can run > at something like 110 nsec per row:
I assume you ran pg_test_timing too:
Testing timing overhead for 3 seconds. Per loop time including overhead: 41.70 nsec Histogram of timing durations: < usec % of total count 1 95.83035 68935459 2 4.16923 2999133 4 0.00037 268 8 0.00004 31 16 0.00000 1 32 0.00000 1
My overhead of 41.70 nsec matches yours.
Did this idea die, or is it still worth considering?
