On 06/14/2011 06:00 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> As far as Greg's proposal is concerned, I don't see how a proposed
> addition of two columns would justify renaming an existing column.
> Additions should not break any sanely-implemented application, but
> renamings certainly will.
>
It's not so much justification as something that makes the inevitable
complaints easier to stomach, in terms of not leaving a really bad taste
in the user's mouth. My thinking is that if we're going to mess with
pg_stat_activity in a way that breaks something, I'd like to see it
completely refactored for better usability in the process. If code
breaks and the resulting investigation by the admin highlights something
new, that offsets some of the bad user experience resulting from the
breakage.
Also, I haven't fully worked whether it makes sense to really change
what current_query means if the idle/transaction component of it gets
moved to another column. Would it be better to set current_query to
null if you are idle, rather than the way it's currently overloaded with
text in that case? I don't like the way this view works at all, but I'm
not sure the best way to change it. Just changing procpid wouldn't be
the only thing on the list though.
--
Greg Smith 2ndQuadrant US greg@2ndQuadrant.com Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support www.2ndQuadrant.us
