From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org>, Karel Zak <zakkr(at)zf(dot)jcu(dot)cz>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: getpid() function |
Date: | 2002-08-04 03:32:15 |
Message-ID: | 6709.1028431935@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>> Let's take it out and wait to see if anyone really still wants it.
> Just when I am ready to throw it away, I come up with a use for the
> function:
> test=> select * from pg_stat_activity where procpid != backend_pid();
> This shows all activity _except_ my session, which pgmonitor or others
> may want to use, and I can think of no other way to do it.
Hm. Actually this seems like an argument for exposing MyBackendId, since
what pg_stat_activity really depends on is BackendId. But as that view
is presently defined, you'd not be able to write
WHERE backendid = my_backend_id()
because the view doesn't expose backendid.
> Comments? Maybe this is why it should be called pg_backend_id and put
> in the stat section.
*Please* don't call it pg_backend_id --- that invites confusion with
BackendId which is a different thing.
I'd suggest pg_backend_pid.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-08-04 03:38:09 | Re: getpid() function |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-08-04 03:03:21 | Re: getpid() function |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-08-04 03:37:08 | Re: CLUSTER and indisclustered |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-08-04 03:22:53 | Re: CLUSTER and indisclustered |