Re: Performance monitor signal handler
| От | Tom Lane |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Performance monitor signal handler |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 1325.984847702@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Re: Performance monitor signal handler (Samuel Sieb <samuel@sieb.net>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Performance monitor signal handler
Re: Performance monitor signal handler |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Samuel Sieb <samuel@sieb.net> writes:
> Just as another suggestion, what about sending the data to a different
> computer, so instead of tying up the database server with processing the
> statistics, you have another computer that has some free time to do the
> processing.
> Some drawbacks are that you can't automatically start/restart it from the
> postmaster and it will put a little more load on the network,
... and a lot more load on the CPU. Same-machine "network" connections
are much cheaper (on most kernels, anyway) than real network
connections.
I think all of this discussion is vast overkill. No one has yet
demonstrated that it's not sufficient to have *one* collector process
and a lossy transmission method. Let's try that first, and if it really
proves to be unworkable then we can get out the lily-gilding equipment.
But there is tons more stuff to do before we have useful stats at all,
and I don't think that this aspect is the most critical part of the
problem.
regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: