Re: pg_stat_activity.waiting_start

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_stat_activity.waiting_start
Date: 2016-12-28 18:06:59
Message-ID: 17698.1482948419@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> writes:
> On 12/28/16 11:25 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The idea of just capturing the wait start for heavyweight locks, and
>> not other lock types, still seems superior to any of the alternatives
>> that have been suggested ...

> Is some kind of alarm a viable option for the others? If setting the
> alarm is cheap,

Setting an alarm is certain to require a gettimeofday and/or a kernel
call. It is far from cheap.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2016-12-28 18:15:00 Re: merging some features from plpgsql2 project
Previous Message Jim Nasby 2016-12-28 18:03:46 Re: pg_stat_activity.waiting_start