Re: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VSquery mean time - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Haribabu Kommi
Subject Re: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VSquery mean time
Date
Msg-id CAJrrPGf7h+p81ZgCOGB=6Ukj9pWE8WY5wok4zYjtEpFsuca_MQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VSquery mean time  ("Jamison, Kirk" <k.jamison@jp.fujitsu.com>)
Responses RE: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VSquery mean time
List pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 6:47 PM Jamison, Kirk <k.jamison@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:

Hi Hari-san,

 

On Sunday, February 10, 2019 2:25 PM (GMT+9), Haribabu Kommi wrote:

> I try to fix it by adding a check for parallel worker or not and based on it

> count them into stats. Patch attached.

> 

> With this patch, currently it doesn't count parallel worker transactions, and

> rest of the stats like seqscan and etc are still get counted. IMO they still

> may need to be counted as those stats represent the number of tuples

> returned and etc.

> 

> Comments?

 

I took a look at your patch, and it’s pretty straightforward.

However, currently the patch does not apply, so I reattached an updated one

to keep the CFbot happy.

 

The previous patch also had a missing header to detect parallel workers

so I added that. --> #include "access/parallel.h"


Thanks for update and review krik.

Regards,
Haribabu Kommi
Fujitsu Australia

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Haribabu Kommi
Date:
Subject: Re: Transaction commits VS Transaction commits (with parallel) VSquery mean time
Next
From: "Tsunakawa, Takayuki"
Date:
Subject: RE: Speed up transaction completion faster after many relations areaccessed in a transaction