| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Sharma <ashu(dot)coek88(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity |
| Date: | 2022-01-14 16:25:45 |
| Message-ID: | 3395490.1642177545@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> Like many I previously had to investigate a slowdown due to sub-transaction
> overflow, and even with the information available in a monitoring view (I had
> to rely on a quick hackish extension as I couldn't patch postgres) it's not
> terribly fun to do this way. On top of that log analyzers like pgBadger could
> help to highlight such a problem.
It feels to me like far too much effort is being invested in fundamentally
the wrong direction here. If the subxact overflow business is causing
real-world performance problems, let's find a way to fix that, not put
effort into monitoring tools that do little to actually alleviate anyone's
pain.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2022-01-14 16:35:48 | Re: [PATCH] psql: \dn+ to show size of each schema (and \dA+ for AMs) |
| Previous Message | John Naylor | 2022-01-14 16:21:54 | Re: do only critical work during single-user vacuum? |