2010/12/23 Tomas Vondra <t...@fuzzy.cz>: > Dne 20.12.2010 00:03, Tom Lane napsal(a): >> I wrote: >>> That is not the number of interest. The number of interest is that it's >>> 8 bytes added onto a struct that currently contains 11 of 'em; in other >>> words a 9% increase in the size of the stats file, and consequently >>> about a 9% increase in the cost of updating it. >> >> Wups, sorry, I was looking at the wrong struct. It's actually an >> addition of 1 doubleword to a struct of 21 of 'em, or about 5%. >> That's still an awful lot in comparison to the prospective usefulness >> of the information. >> >> regards, tom lane >> > > OK, so here goes the simplified patch - it tracks one reset timestamp > for a background writer and for each database.
I think you forgot the attachment. -- 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
