| From: | Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-admin <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_activity |
| Date: | 2018-06-11 16:12:28 |
| Message-ID: | 6ef6f956-595e-d0c4-36bd-dd9d10772b11@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin |
On 06/11/2018 10:21 AM, David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 8:07 AM, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com
> <mailto:ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>>wrote:
>
> That won't work, because that would catch any query on a table which
> happens to have the string "select" in a table, index or column name.
>
>
> I don't believe what you are asking is possible using only
> pg_stat_activity. One thought that comes to mind is to identify, via
> pg_locks, sessions that hold non-read-only locks and then exclude the rows
> in pg_stat_activity that match up with those sessions.
>
> David J.
>
Thanks. I'll try that.
--
Angular momentum makes the world go 'round.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rui DeSousa | 2018-06-11 16:27:56 | Re: pg_stat_activity |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2018-06-11 15:21:56 | Re: pg_stat_activity |