Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Regarding Tom's objection to the fundamental issue of providing lwlocks
> data, I agree that maybe it's the wrong layer to be measuring to provide
> data to DBAs, but not providing any data is worse, because then even PG
> developers cannot know what are the real bottlenecks; and it's hard to
> see what other layer we need to be measuring. Maybe this can serve as a
> foundation to discover useful things to provide in the future.
FWIW, I am not objecting to having the *ability* to collect such data.
I am questioning the usefulness/wisdom of having it turned on by
default, and I am also concerned about whether there is residual
overhead even when it's not turned on.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
