| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: exposing wait events for non-backends (was: Tracking wait event for latches) |
| Date: | 2016-12-12 16:33:47 |
| Message-ID: | 20161212163347.3is5iwiqetvpzzzd@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-12-12 13:26:32 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>
> > So, one of the problems in this patch as committed is that for any
> > process that doesn't show up in pg_stat_activity, there's no way to
> > see the wait event information. That sucks. I think there are
> > basically two ways to fix this:
> >
> > 1. Show all processes that have a PGPROC in pg_stat_activity,
> > including auxiliary processes and whatnot, and use some new field in
> > pg_stat_activity to indicate the process type.
> >
> > 2. Add a second view, say pg_stat_system_activity, to show the
> > processes that don't appear in pg_stat_activity. A bunch of columns
> > could likely be omitted, but there would be some duplication, too.
> >
> > Preferences?
>
> I vote 1.
+1
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David G. Johnston | 2016-12-12 16:34:47 | Re: exposing wait events for non-backends (was: Tracking wait event for latches) |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2016-12-12 16:33:01 | Nested Wait Events? |