Re: Background Processes and reporting

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Vladimir Borodin <root(at)simply(dot)name>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Background Processes and reporting
Date: 2016-03-11 22:15:21
Message-ID: 20160311221521.grasamnvqblrufg7@alap3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2016-03-12 01:05:43 +0300, Vladimir Borodin wrote:
> > 12 марта 2016 г., в 0:22, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> написал(а):
> > Only that it isn't. It's stored in PGPROC.
>
> Sorry, I missed that. So monitoring of wait events for auxiliary processes still could be implemented?

It's basically a question of where to report the information.

> >> Seems that current implementation doesn’t give reasonable ways to
> >> implement all that features and it is really sad.
> >
> > Why is that?
>
> Storing information about wait event in 4 bytes gives an ability to
> store only wait type and event. No way to store duration or extra
> information (i.e. buffer number for I/O events or buffer manager
> LWLocks). Maybe I’m missing something...

Sure, but that that's just incrementally building features?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joel Jacobson 2016-03-11 22:22:13 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Provide much better wait information in pg_stat_activity.
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2016-03-11 22:09:57 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Provide much better wait information in pg_stat_activity.