Re: Why our counters need to be time-based WAS: WIP: cross column correlation ...
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, pgsql-hackers Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-02-28T18:54:23Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: >> On 2/28/11 10:24 AM, Robert Haas wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: >>>> On the other hand, anything which increases the size of pg_statistic >>>> would be a nightmare. > >>> Hmm? > >> Like replacing each statistic with a series of time-based buckets, which >> would then increase the size of the table by 5X to 10X. That was the >> first solution I thought of, and rejected. > > I think Josh is thinking of the stats collector's dump file, not > pg_statistic. Yeah. > Ultimately we need to think of a reporting mechanism that's a bit > smarter than "rewrite the whole file for any update" ... Well, we have these things called "tables". Any chance of using those? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company