Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

From: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, "andres(at)anarazel(dot)de" <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Vladimir Borodin <root(at)simply(dot)name>, Ildus Kurbangaliev <i(dot)kurbangaliev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive
Date: 2016-03-10 05:18:41
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
> > Thanks for the suggestion. I have updated the patch to include
wait_event_type information in the wait_event table.
> I think we should remove "a server process is" from all of these entries.
> Also, I think this kind of thing should be tightened up:
> + <entry>A server process is waiting on any one of the
> + buffer locks to read or write the commit_timestamp page in the
> + pg_commit_ts subdirectory.</entry>
> I'd just write: Waiting to read or write a commit timestamp buffer.

Okay, changed as per suggestion and fixed the morerows issue pointed by

With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

Attachment Content-Type Size
extend_pg_stat_activity_v14.patch application/octet-stream 54.3 KB

In response to


Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2016-03-10 05:29:50 Re: [PROPOSAL] VACUUM Progress Checker.
Previous Message Ashutosh Bapat 2016-03-10 05:10:38 Re: Pushing down sorted joins