Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes: > Like many I previously had to investigate a slowdown due to sub-transaction > overflow, and even with the information available in a monitoring view (I had > to rely on a quick hackish extension as I couldn't patch postgres) it's not > terribly fun to do this way. On top of that log analyzers like pgBadger could > help to highlight such a problem.
It feels to me like far too much effort is being invested in fundamentally the wrong direction here. If the subxact overflow business is causing real-world performance problems, let's find a way to fix that, not put effort into monitoring tools that do little to actually alleviate anyone's pain.
I don't think it is really a big effort or big change. But I completely agree with you that if we can completely resolve this issue then there is no point in providing any such status or LOG.
