Re: IDLE in transaction introspection

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Scott Mead <scottm(at)openscg(dot)com> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 6:13 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
>> wrote:
>> > Actually, for the future, it might be useful to have a "state" column,
>> > that holds the idle/in transaction/running status, instead of the
>> > tools having to parse the query text to get that information...
>>
>> +1 for doing it this way. Splitting "current_query" into "query" and
>> "state" would be more elegant and easier to use all around.
>>
>
> I'm all for splitting it out actually. My concern was that I would break
> the 'ba-gillion' monitoring tools that already have support for
> pg_stat_activity if I dropped a column. What if we had:
>
> 'state' : idle | in transaction | running ( per Robert )
>

Sorry per Robert and Jaime

> 'current_query' : the most recent query (either last / currently
> running)
>
> That may be a bit tougher to get across to people though (especially in
> the case where state='<IDLE>').
>
> I'll rework this when I don't have trick-or-treaters coming to the front
> door :)
>
> --
> Scott Mead
> OpenSCG http://www.openscg.com
>
>
>> --
>> Robert Haas
>> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>
>
>