Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive
Дата
Msg-id 4067.1439561494@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive  (Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Ildus Kurbangaliev <
> i.kurbangaliev@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
>> This is why I think we shoudn't place wait event into PgBackendStatus. It
>> could be placed into PGPROC or even separate data structure with different
>> concurrency model which would be most suitable for monitoring.

> +1 for tracking wait events not only for backends

> Ildus, could you do following?
> 1) Extract LWLocks refactoring into separate patch.
> 2) Make a patch with storing current wait event information in PGPROC.

What will this accomplish exactly, other than making it more complicated
to make a copy of the information when we capture an activity snapshot?
You'll have to get data out of two places, which do not have any
synchronization protocol defined between them.
        regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alexander Korotkov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive
Следующее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: why can the isolation tester handle only one waiting process?