Re: procpid? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Smith
Subject Re: procpid?
Date
Msg-id 4DFADA8B.7090508@2ndQuadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: procpid?  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
Responses Re: procpid?
List pgsql-hackers
On 06/16/2011 05:27 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Greg Smith wrote:
>    
>> -It is still useful to set current_query to descriptive text in the
>> cases where the transaction is<IDLE>  etc.
>>      
> Uh, if we are going to do that, why not just add the boolean columns to
> the existing view?  Clearly renaming procpid isn't worth creating
> another view.
>    

I'm not completely set on this either way; that's why I suggested a 
study that digs into typical monitoring system queries would be useful.  
Even the current view is pushing the limits for how much you can put 
into something that intends to be human-readable though.  Adding a new 
pile of columns to it has some downsides there.

I hadn't ever tried to write down everything I'd like to see changed 
here until this week, so there may be further column churn that 
justifies a new view too.  I think the whole idea needs to get chewed on 
a bit more.

-- 
Greg Smith   2ndQuadrant US    greg@2ndQuadrant.com   Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services, and 24x7 Support  www.2ndQuadrant.us




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: SSI work for 9.1
Next
From: Dan Ports
Date:
Subject: Re: SSI work for 9.1