Re: Order of pg_stat_activity timestamp columns

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Order of pg_stat_activity timestamp columns
Date: 2010-03-17 20:51:43
Message-ID: 9837222c1003171351s2c3199aer2e7e3a9a9196f76d@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 21:42, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> Has anyone ever noticed that the order of pg_stat_activity timestamp
> columns is illogical:
>
>  xact_start       | timestamp with time zone |
>  query_start      | timestamp with time zone |
>  backend_start    | timestamp with time zone |

Well, 7.4 had only "query start". 8.1 added backend. 8.3 added
transaction. So I guess my original guess that things were just added
on the end was wrong :-)

> query_start is always between the other two timestamps.  Moving
> query_start before xact_start would make the most sense.  I wouldn't
> bring this up except we just added application_name before these
> columns, so we are already going to have different column locations for
> these fields in 9.0.
>
> Should we move query_start?

Or perhaps we should consider moving application_name to the end so it
*doesn't* break them?

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2010-03-17 20:54:10 Re: Getting to beta1
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2010-03-17 20:44:05 Re: An idle thought