From: | nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org (Neil Conway) |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: getpid() function |
Date: | 2002-07-31 01:17:58 |
Message-ID: | 20020731011758.GA20039@klamath.dyndns.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 08:40:13PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> I have implemented this TODO item:
>
> * Add getpid() function to backend
>
> There were a large number of pg_stat functions that access pids and
> backends slots so I added it there:
>
> test=> select pg_stat_get_backend_mypid();
If we're going to add it to pg_stat_*, why is 'backend' part of the
name? All the existing backend_* function fetch some piece of data
about a given backend -- whereas this function does not (it takes
no arguments).
IMHO, a better name would be something like 'backend_process_id()',
or 'unix_pid', or 'backend_pid()'.
Also, can you add some documentation on this?
Cheers,
Neil
--
Neil Conway <neilconway(at)rogers(dot)com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2002-07-31 01:28:09 | Re: Have been accepted as a writer for "The Register" |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-07-31 00:40:13 | getpid() function |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-07-31 01:48:42 | Re: getpid() function |
Previous Message | Matthew T. O'Connor | 2002-07-31 01:09:01 | Re: Why is MySQL more chosen over PostgreSQL? |