Re: [Proposal] Expose internal MultiXact member count function for efficient monitoring

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Naga Appani <nagnrik(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(at)vondra(dot)me>, Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com>, torikoshia <torikoshia(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Expose internal MultiXact member count function for efficient monitoring
Date: 2026-09-21 23:01:25
Message-ID: arG3RW2R3qsIj5zJ@paquier.xyz
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> I didn't know where else to ask:

That sounds like the correct place to me. :D

> Why is pg_get_multixact_stats() called _stats? From what I can tell it doesn't
> return anything stats like? What it returns is more like the *state* of the
> subsystem?

Hmm. Perhaps pg_get_multixact_state() then? We still have time to
adjust that before the release. If somebody has a better idea of
name, please feel free.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sami Imseih 2026-09-21 23:22:35 Re: [Proposal] Expose internal MultiXact member count function for efficient monitoring
Previous Message Sami Imseih 2026-09-21 22:58:05 Re: Proposal: expose heavyweight lock wait start time in pg_stat_activity