From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Takahiro Itagaki <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: ps display "waiting for max_standby_delay" |
Date: | 2010-06-10 22:23:09 |
Message-ID: | 201006102223.o5AMN9o20640@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Takahiro Itagaki wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have codes to change ps display for recovery process during hot standby.
> The current code always shows max_standby_delay for the message, but how
> about showing actual waiting time instead? Since DBAs can always get the
> parameter from postgresql.conf they wrote, so the parameter value itself
> is not so useful. Actual waiting time might be more useful to determine
> which values to be set to max_standby_delay, no?
>
> [backend/storage/ipc/standby.c]
> snprintf(new_status + len, 50,
> " waiting for max_standby_delay (%d ms)",
> MaxStandbyDelay); ==> GetCurrentTimestamp() - waitStart
> set_ps_display(new_status, false);
>
> I think SQL-based activity view will be more useful than ps display,
> but it's an item for 9.1.
Sounds interesting, but how often would the ps statust display be
updated? I hope not too often.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ None of us is going to be here forever. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-06-10 22:54:57 | Re: Invalid YAML output from EXPLAIN |
Previous Message | Marko Kreen | 2010-06-10 22:10:50 | Re: Exposing the Xact commit order to the user |