Re: procpid?

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of mié jun 15 08:47:58 -0400 2011:
>>> Now, that's a suggestion I could very possibly get behind.  Though the
>>> fact that it would leave us with pg_activity / pg_stat_replication
>>> seems less than ideal.  Maybe pg_activity isn't the best name
>>> either... bikeshedding time!
>
>> pg_sessions?
>
> Yeah.  Or pg_stat_sessions if you want to keep it looking like it's part
> of the pg_stat_ family.  (I'm not sure if we do, since it's really a
> completely independent facility.  OTOH, if we don't name it that way,
> we're kind of bound to move the documentation into the System Views
> chapter, whereas it'd be better to keep it where it is.)

I've always found the fact that the system views are documented in two
different places to be somewhat confusing. It doesn't help that the
documentation for the statistics views is quite a bit less detailed.

At any rate, I like "sessions". That's what it is, after all. But I
will note that we had better be darn sure to make all the changes we
want to make in one go, because I dowanna have to create pg_sessions2
(or pg_tessions?) in a year or three.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company