Re: Reaping Temp tables to avoid XID wraparound

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 3:41 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 09:56:28AM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > 2. Or probably even better, just put it in PgBackendStatus? Overhead here
> > is a lot cheaper than PGPROC.
> >
> > ISTM 2 is probably the most reasonable option here?
>
> Yes, I forgot this one. That would be more consistent, even if the
> information can be out of date quickly we don't care here.
>

I think it would be something like the attached. Thoughts?

I did the "insert column in the middle of pg_stat_get_activity", I'm not
sure that is right -- how do we treate that one? Do we just append at the
end because people are expected to use the pg_stat_activity view? It's a
nontrivial part of the patch.

That one aside, does the general way to track it appear reasonable? (docs
excluded until we have agreement on that)

And should we also expose the oid in pg_stat_activity in this case, since
we have it?

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