Tom Lane wrote:
Gregory Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
There are downsides:

Insurmountable ones at that.  This one already makes it a non-starter:

a) the overhead of counting rows and loops is there for every query execution,
even if you don't do explain analyze.

and you are also engaging in a flight of fantasy about what the
client-side code might be able to handle.  Particularly if it's buried
inside, say, httpd or some huge Java app.  Yeah, you could possibly make
it work for the case that the problem query was manually executed in
psql, but that doesn't cover very much real-world territory.

I think there's two different use cases here. The one that Greg's proposal would be good for is a GUI, like pgAdmin. It would be cool to see how a query progresses through the EXPLAIN tree when you run it from the query tool. That would be great for visualizing the executor; a great teaching tool.

But I agree it's no good for use by a DBA to monitor a live system running a real-world application. For that we do need something else.

You'd be far more likely to get somewhere with a design that involves
looking from another session to see if anything's happening.  In the
case of queries that are making database changes, pgstattuple is
certainly a usable option.  For SELECT-only queries, I agree it's
harder, but it's still possible.  I seem to recall some discussion of
including a low-overhead progress counter of some kind in the
pg_stat_activity state exposed by a backend.  The number of rows so far
processed by execMain.c in the current query might do for the

Yeah, something like this would be better for monitoring a live system.

The number of rows processed by execMain.c would only count the number of rows processed by the top node of the tree, right? For a query that for example performs a gigantic sort, that would be 0 until the sort is done, which is not good. It's hard to come up with a single counter that's representative :-(.

  Heikki Linnakangas

Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to