Re: Per backend relation statistics tracking
От | Sami Imseih |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Per backend relation statistics tracking |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA5RZ0vi11ut34nqFkzvrE=PqotnE1OpZMPc0jyCDddNEAY-3g@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Per backend relation statistics tracking (Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Per backend relation statistics tracking
Re: Per backend relation statistics tracking |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Thanks for the patches. I have not gone through them in detail yet, but +1 on adding backend activity stats. This provides another level of drill down to spot anomalous sessions or different patterns across applications. I also think we will want more than just relation stats. For example, columns from pg_statio already look useful on a per-backend aggregate level. Beyond that, I can imagine future additions like number of transactions, subtransactions, I/O stats, conflicts, etc. All of these seem like valuable per-backend aggregates. That is why I think we should be careful about naming. pg_stat_backend feels very generic, but right now it only shows relation stats. Maybe we call it pg_stat_backend_tables to start? Then if we later add I/O, we could have pg_stat_backend_io, or for conflicts, pg_stat_backend_conflicts, etc. That way we keep things more flexible, instead of trying to fit everything into one view. It also helps us avoid having to rename views in the future. What do you think? -- Sami Imseih Amazon Web Services (AWS)
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: