Re: pg_stat_*_columns?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Jeff Janes
Тема Re: pg_stat_*_columns?
Дата
Msg-id CAMkU=1xaWRytpEPVGcDgYmedVvQA+DiEmp31U8CUW9KLw20rJA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: pg_stat_*_columns?  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
Ответы Re: pg_stat_*_columns?
Список pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 7:47 PM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> wrote:
On 6/8/15 3:26 PM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
So I've heard from Magnus Hagander today IRL at our Stockholm PostgreSQL
User Group meeting where we discussed this idea. He told me the overhead
in the statistics collector is mainly when reading from it, not that
much when writing to it.

I've heard enough stories of people moving the stats files to faster storage that I'm not sure how true that really is...


Were the stories (or the experience which lead to the stories) on 9.3 or later?  Do they have a good way to reproduce it for testing purposes?

When I was testing the stat file split patch, one thing I noticed is that on the ext4 file system, when you atomically replace a file by renaming a file over the top of an existing file name, it will automatically fsync the file being renamed. This is exactly what we don't want in the case of the temp stats files.  But there seems to be no way to circumvent it, other than unlinking the target file before the rename (which of course defeats the point of atomic replacement), or moving to a different filesystem for the stats files.

Perhaps the problem was related to that.

Cheers,

Jeff

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andres Freund
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Removing SSL renegotiation (Was: Should we back-patch SSL renegotiation fixes?)
Следующее
От: Peter Geoghegan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: UPSERT on partition