| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Csaba Nagy <nagy(at)ecircle-ag(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>, postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: fsutil ideas |
| Date: | 2006-02-24 19:16:57 |
| Message-ID: | 1140808617.3716.12.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Ühel kenal päeval, R, 2006-02-24 kell 19:20, kirjutas Csaba Nagy:
> On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 19:12, Rod Taylor wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-02-24 at 12:48 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
> > > > I watch for table bloat but I haven't figured out a nice way of tracking
> > > > down the postgresql process with the oldest transaction running short of
> > > > patching PostgreSQL to report the XID for a connection in
> > > > pg_stat_activity.
>
> But I'm afraid that a long running transaction with many short queries
> will not even show up in pg_stat_activity.
It will show as "<IDLE> in transaction"
The harder part would be knowing how long the queri has been running in
wallclock time, not in transactions.
---------------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2006-02-24 19:57:19 | Re: how solve diff of API counstruct_md_array between |
| Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2006-02-24 18:33:58 | Re: fsutil ideas |