On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 04:58:47 -0700 Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> 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: Not yet, but I'll try to do it. > > > > > 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 -- Yugo Nagata <nag...@sraoss.co.jp> -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
