| From: | jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, "Christopher Browne" <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Finding if old transactions are running... |
| Date: | 2005-02-25 07:24:04 |
| Message-ID: | 18646.202.47.227.16.1109316244.squirrel@202.47.227.16 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> jtv(at)xs4all(dot)nl writes:
> pg_locks certainly seems like a better solution. Perhaps it didn't
> exist when you went with pg_stat_activity? Can't recall offhand.
Neither do I... But I do need something that will work with at least any
recent backend version--say, 7.2 or since. The more the better, really.
Any idea how old pg_locks is?
> Note that you still want to look for your old backend's PID; it seems
> impractically expensive to keep track of the current transaction's XID.
> (At a minimum that would cost another query per xact...)
Yes, I see now--I thought I had the transaction ID handy already anyway,
but I didn't. Thanks.
Jeroen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | John Hansen | 2005-02-25 08:31:33 | Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32 |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2005-02-25 07:08:29 | Re: [pgsql-hackers-win32] UNICODE/UTF-8 on win32 |