| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix pg_stat_get_backend_wait_event() for aux processes |
| Date: | 2026-02-05 16:58:41 |
| Message-ID: | 7ik7bb7vujldmeq2lfonoqzdmnmfwejr643kdjhfqdejhroh7v@dd3oilvh5yg2 |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2026-02-04 17:48:57 -0600, Sami Imseih wrote:
> >
> > There is also a discussion [0] about wait event/activity field
> > inconsistency
> > with pg_stat_activity with a repro in [1].
>
>
> The repro I was referring to in [1] is actually
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ab1c0a7d-e789-5ef5-1180-42708ac6fe2d%40postgrespro.ru
That is inherent. The wait event is updated in an unsynchronized fashion. As
noted in that thread.
Making it synchronized (via st_changecount) would make wait event overhead
vastly higher.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2026-02-05 17:14:27 | Re: FileFallocate misbehaving on XFS |
| Previous Message | Nazir Bilal Yavuz | 2026-02-05 16:56:24 | Re: Don't synchronously wait for already-in-progress IO in read stream |