Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Transaction start in pg_stat_activity

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "pgsql-patches" <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Transaction start in pg_stat_activity
Date: 2006-11-20 16:32:22
Message-ID: 7341.1164040342@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
"Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, 2006-11-20 at 10:58 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> There is no way we are putting a gettimeofday() call into
>> GetSnapshotData.  I thought you were focused on performance??

> My understanding was there was already a gettimeofday() call per
> statement which is displayed in pg_stat_activity. It seems relatively
> straightforward to have another column which is *not* updated for each
> statement when we are in SERIALIZABLE mode and CommandId > 1. 

What for?  The proposal already covers transaction start and statement
start, and those are the only two timestamps available (without adding
extra gettimeofday() calls).  What you propose will merely repeat one of
them.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2006-11-20 16:34:44
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Shutting down a warm standby database in 8.2beta3
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-11-20 16:30:04
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Shutting down a warm standby database in 8.2beta3

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2006-11-20 16:41:43
Subject: Re: Transaction start in pg_stat_activity
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2006-11-20 16:25:11
Subject: Re: Transaction start in pg_stat_activity

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group