Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I don't have a problem with removing it as a writable option ... but
> >> I'm thinking we should leave it as a read-only GUC parameter (like
> >> the several others we have already). Otherwise we'll need to add some
> >> other method of finding out whether the collector is running.
> > Why would a user care?
> luser> It's not collecting statistics!
> us> Is the collector running?
> luser> How should I know?
> us> er ...
> If we don't have a way to check this, we'll regret it soon enough...
> now maybe a GUC setting isn't the optimal way, but I think we need
> *some* way besides ps. ps doesn't work remotely and I think there's
> no simple equivalent under Windows either.
Sure, but the GUC only reports that it thinks the stats collector
started, not whether it is running or not. I think 'ps' is a fine way
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
In response to
pgsql-bugs by date
|Next:||From: Andreas Pflug||Date: 2005-06-14 07:25:12|
|Subject: Re: BUG #1707: statistics collector starts with stats_start_collector|
|Previous:||From: Klint Gore||Date: 2005-06-14 01:53:58|
|Subject: Re: BUG #1698: Different behavior in UNIQUE and DISTINCT|
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Neil Conway||Date: 2005-06-14 04:39:47|
|Subject: hash join: probe both inputs first|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2005-06-14 03:04:28|
|Subject: Re: logfile for psql patch update|