Hi, (please don't top-reply on this list)
On 2017-07-19 14:04:39 +0900, Yugo Nagata wrote: > On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 10:10:49 -0400 > Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Thank you for your comments. I understand the problem of my proposal > patch. Does that mean you're trying to rewrite it in the way that was suggested: > > > Another, > > > pretty half-baked, approach would be to add a procsignal triggering idle > > > backends to send stats, and send that to all idle backends when querying > > > stats. We could even publish the number of outstanding stats updates in > > > PGXACT or such, without any locking, and send it only to those that have > > > outstanding ones. > > > > If somebody wanted to do the work, that'd be a viable answer IMO. You'd > > really want to not wake backends that have nothing more to send, but > > I agree that it'd be possible to advertise that in shared memory. or are you planning to just let the issue leave be? - Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
