Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: procpid?

From: Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>
To: Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: procpid?
Date: 2011-06-15 16:53:24
Message-ID: BD0EAD6DDD5F34A9C66F7782@apophis.local (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers

--On 15. Juni 2011 16:47:55 +0000 Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com> wrote:

> Or perhaps pg_connections. Yes, +1 to making things fully backwards
> compatible by keeping pg_stat_activity around but making a better
> designed and better named table (view/SRF/whatever).

I thought about that too when reading the thread the first time, but 
"pg_stat_sessions" sounds better. Our documentation also primarily refers to a 
database connection as a "session", i think.



In response to

  • Re: procpid? at 2011-06-15 16:47:55 from Greg Sabino Mullane


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2011-06-15 16:53:59
Subject: Re: creating CHECK constraints as NOT VALID
Previous:From: Peter GeogheganDate: 2011-06-15 16:52:39
Subject: Re: bad posix_fadvise support causes initdb to exit ungracefully

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group