Re: procpid? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Sabino Mullane
Subject Re: procpid?
Date
Msg-id 9c61a43ed89612a7921ebf5d50ea28ef@biglumber.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: procpid?  (Bernd Helmle <mailings@oopsware.de>)
Responses Re: procpid?
Re: procpid?
List pgsql-hackers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160


>> Or perhaps pg_connections. Yes, +1 to making things fully backwards
>> compatible by keeping pg_stat_activity around but making a better
>> designed and better named table (view/SRF/whatever).

> I thought about that too when reading the thread the first time, but 
> "pg_stat_sessions" sounds better. Our documentation also primarily refers to a 
> database connection as a "session", i think.

No, this is clearly connections, not sessions. At least based on the items 
in the postgresql.conf file, especially max_connections (probably one of the 
items most closely associated with pg_stat_activity)

- -- 
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com
End Point Corporation http://www.endpoint.com/
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 201106161132
http://biglumber.com/x/web?pk=2529DF6AB8F79407E94445B4BC9B906714964AC8
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iEYEAREDAAYFAk36IjYACgkQvJuQZxSWSsg8MgCgkMNw1o37cgmtJdYBAsGl7kz6
Q8sAoISFra0LyQjyKw3zcapWBdCLh2RV
=EYAc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: Latch implementation that wakes on postmaster death on both win32 and Unix
Next
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: [WIP] [Stream] Preview of pg_type changes