On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Ants Aasma <a...@cybertec.at> wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> This seems to have bitrotted again. :-( >>> >>> Can you please rebase again? >> >> Rebased. > > I've committed the core of this. I left out the stats collector > stuff, because it's still per-table and I think perhaps we should back > off to just per-database. I changed it so that it does not conflate > wait time with I/O time. Maybe there should be a separate method of > measuring wait time, but I don't think it's a good idea for the > per-backend stats to measure a different thing than what gets reported > up to the stats collector - we should have ONE definition of each > counter. I also tweaked the EXPLAIN output format a bit, and the > docs.
And I've now committed the pg_stat_statements code as well, hopefully not stomping too badly one what Tom's apparently in the midst of doing with Peter's pg_stat_statements patch. I committed this almost exactly as submitted; just a minor code style correction and a few documentation enhancements. -- 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
