Re: PG Statistics - Mailing list pgsql-performance

From mcelroy, tim
Subject Re: PG Statistics
Date
Msg-id 0C4841B42F87D51195BD00B0D020F5CB044B2469@morpheus.bostonstock.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to PG Statistics  ("mcelroy, tim" <tim.mcelroy@bostonstock.com>)
List pgsql-performance

Thank you for the insight Michael.  I'll be performing some tests with the various setting on/off this week and will post the results.

Tim

 -----Original Message-----
From:   Michael Fuhr [mailto:mike@fuhr.org]
Sent:   Monday, March 13, 2006 7:19 PM
To:     mcelroy, tim
Cc:     'pgsql-performance@postgresql.org'
Subject:        Re: [PERFORM] PG Statistics

On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 06:49:39PM -0500, mcelroy, tim wrote:
> Does anyone know how much of a performance hit turning stats_block_level and
> stats_row_level on will incur?  Do both need to be on to gather cache
> related statistics?  I know the annotated_conf_80 document states to only
> turn them on for debug but if they're not that performance intensive I
> cannot see the harm.

I ran some tests a few months ago and found that stats_command_string
had a significant impact, whereas stats_block_level and stats_row_level
were almost negligible.  Here are my test results:

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2005-12/msg00307.php

Your results may vary.  If you see substantially different results
then please post the particulars.

--
Michael Fuhr

pgsql-performance by date:

Previous
From: "andremachado"
Date:
Subject: firebird X postgresql 8.1.2 windows, performance comparison
Next
From: "mcelroy, tim"
Date:
Subject: Re: PG Statistics