From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: System username in pg_stat_activity |
Date: | 2024-02-16 19:57:59 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEw_7pSw38ya1RagWBs85H4n8MGH-k-FTstRGnayQyA4Kg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 8:41 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2024-01-10 12:46:34 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> > The attached patch adds a column "authuser" to pg_stat_activity which
> > contains the username of the externally authenticated user, being the
> > same value as the SYSTEM_USER keyword returns in a backend.
>
> I continue to think that it's a bad idea to make pg_stat_activity ever wider
> with columns that do not actually describe properties that change across the
> course of a session. Yes, there's the argument that that ship has sailed, but
> I don't think that's a good reason to continue ever further down that road.
>
> It's not just a usability issue, it also makes it more expensive to query
> pg_stat_activity. This is of course more pronounced with textual columns than
> with integer ones.
That's a fair point, but I do think that has in most ways already sailed, yes.
I mean, we could split it into more than one view. But adding a new
view for every new thing we want to show is also not very good from
either a usability or performance perspective. So where would we put
it?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2024-02-16 20:09:51 | Re: glibc qsort() vulnerability |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2024-02-16 19:55:39 | Re: System username in pg_stat_activity |