Re: [PROPOSAL] timestamp informations to pg_stat_statements - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] timestamp informations to pg_stat_statements
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZRSY9Fa3Ve1E=xFL-qsOQHH92xaV-zeFPV+j5k9kMXvkg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PROPOSAL] timestamp informations to pg_stat_statements  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [PROPOSAL] timestamp informations to pg_stat_statements  (Jason Kim <dialogbox@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> The concern I've got about this proposal is that the results get very
> questionable as soon as we start dropping statement entries for lack
> of space.  last_executed would be okay, perhaps, but first_executed
> not so much.

Agreed.

Also, for what it's worth, I should point out to Jun that
GetCurrentTimestamp() should definitely not be called when a spinlock
is held like that.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Obsolete comment within fmgr.c
Next
From: Jan Wieck
Date:
Subject: Re: DO with a large amount of statements get stuck with high memory consumption