From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive |
Date: | 2015-06-22 17:59:12 |
Message-ID: | CAKFQuwaEhMSGp_cKqe1yavxQbC=HE4wbC0Z37c6ch3aqH5S+nw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> and doesn't require a developer to
> interpret the results,
[...]
> We could
> also invent codes for things like "I'm doing a pg_usleep because I've
> exceeded max_spins_per_delay" and "I'm waiting for a cleanup lock on a
> buffer" and maybe a few others.
>
>
In addition to the codes themselves I think it would aid less-experienced
operators if we would provide a meta-data categorization of the codes.
Something like, I/O Sub-System; Storage Maintenance; Concurrency, etc..
There could be a section in the documentation with these topics as section
headings and a listing and explanation of each of the possible code would
then be described within.
The meta-information is already embedded within the code/descriptions but
explicitly pulling them out would be, IMO, more user-friendly and likely
also aid in triage and speed-of-recognition when reading the corresponding
code/description.
David J.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2015-06-22 18:16:03 | Re: Tab completion for TABLESAMPLE |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2015-06-22 17:44:27 | Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive |