Re: proposal: add 'waiting for replication' to pg_stat_activity.state

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Julian Schauder <julian(dot)schauder(at)credativ(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: add 'waiting for replication' to pg_stat_activity.state
Date: 2016-02-01 22:39:30
Message-ID: 20160201223930.GA102817@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Thomas Munro wrote:

> Thinking of other patches in flight, I think I'd want the proposed
> N-sync standbys feature to be able to explain in more detail what it's
> waiting for (and likewise my causal reads proposal which does that via
> the process title), though I realise that the details of how/where to
> do that are changing in the "replace pg_stat_activity.waiting" thread
> which this patch is waiting on.

Right, interesting thought. I think that for the time being we should
close this one as returned with feedback, since there's no point in
keeping it open in commitfest. I encourage the author (and everyone
else) to look at the other patch and help there, which is going to
ultimately achieve the outcome desired with this patch.

Álvaro Herrera
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2016-02-01 22:49:58 Re: Removing Functionally Dependent GROUP BY Columns
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2016-02-01 22:32:15 Re: checkpointer continuous flushing