On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > The real problem with this whole area is that we know there are > systems floating around where the amount of time taken to grab timestamps > like this is just terrible.
Assuming the feature is off by default (and I can't imagine we'd consider anything else), I don't see why that should be cause for concern. If the instrumentation creates too much system load, then don't use it: simple as that. A more interesting question is "how much load does this feature create even when it's turned off?". The other big problem for a patch of this sort is that it would bloat the stats file. I think we really need to come up with a more scalable alternative to the current system, but I haven't looked the current system in enough detail to have a clear feeling about what such an alternative would look like. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
