Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> Kevin Grittner wrote:
>> It would scan better, to my mind, if we moved backend_start ahead
>> of xact_start.
>
> Yes, that is another idea that would work, though Tom's idea that
> the query start should be near the query makes sense.
Well, in an ideal world, I would put the current_query column at the
end, so that long queries wouldn't make it hard to see the other
values. I think I'd want to squeeze waiting in between the
timestamps and the query. I would generally want items to be close
together if related and farther down the field list if they were
more volatile. For example, since application_name can be changed
but client_* values can't, I'd put application_name later --
possibly right before the timestamps.
If we're willing to re-order the existing columns, why not try to
make the whole thing sane?
-Kevin