Re: Fully replacing ps_status (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql:
| От | Mark Kirkwood |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Fully replacing ps_status (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 44A1C3BC.6080100@paradise.net.nz обсуждение |
| Ответ на | Fully replacing ps_status (was Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add GUC update_process_title to control whether 'ps' display is) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > momjian@postgresql.org (Bruce Momjian) writes: >> Add GUC update_process_title to control whether 'ps' display is updated >> for every command, default to on. > > It strikes me that the ps_status support provides one important bit of > information that is currently hard to get elsewhere; specifically, the > "waiting" flag that gets added while blocked on a lock. You can find > out if a process is blocked by looking in pg_locks, but that's a fairly > expensive probe in itself and then you have to join to pg_stat_activity > to make any sense of it. I wonder if we should add a "waiting" boolean > column to pg_stat_activity? Given the new implementation of > pg_stat_activity, updating such a flag would be pretty cheap. > > Funny - today I was just thinking how useful that would be! Cheers Mark
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: