| From: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, pgsql-docs(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Add "io worker" as backend_type to the pg_stat_activity documentation |
| Date: | 2026-07-21 19:04:15 |
| Message-ID: | 4aff5b0f5a1bf3b487d06daec5ed5a287afa7a22.camel@cybertec.at |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
On Wed, 2026-07-22 at 01:48 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 09:58:34AM +0200, Laurenz Albe wrote:
> > > > I happened to notice that "io worker" was missing in the list of
> > > > backend types in the pg_stat_activity documentation.
>
> Isn't it better to add the other missing process names as well, such as
> slotsync worker, data checksums launcher, data checksums worker, and
> REPACK decoding worker?
>
> Also, the current list says "logical replication worker", but that isn't
> an actual process name. It refers to four different worker types:
> logical replication apply worker, logical replication parallel worker,
> logical replication sequence synchronization worker, and logical replication
> table synchronization worker. Isn't it better to list those actual
> process names instead?
You are right. Here is patch v3 with a completed list; I hope I didn't
forget anything.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v3-0001-Properly-document-pg_stat_activity.backend_type.patch | text/x-patch | 7.8 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-07-21 22:18:33 | Re: Add "io worker" as backend_type to the pg_stat_activity documentation |
| Previous Message | Brian Brennglass | 2026-07-21 17:30:13 | Re: [PATCH] doc: outline all planner nodes |