| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Smith <smithpb2250(at)gmail(dot)com>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Design of pg_stat_subscription_workers vs pgstats |
| Date: | 2022-02-24 12:23:55 |
| Message-ID: | ca9f44f0-a553-2f57-8017-d0ad84e06a6a@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 24.02.22 12:46, Masahiko Sawada wrote:
>> We have a view called pg_stat_activity, which is very well known. From
>> that perspective, "activity" means what is happening right now or what
>> has happened most recently. The reworked view in this patch does not
>> contain that (we already have pg_stat_subscription for that), but it
>> contains accumulated counters.
> Right.
>
> What pg_stat_subscription shows is rather suitable for the name
> pg_stat_subscription_activity than the reworked view. But switching
> these names would also not be a good idea. I think it's better to use
> "subscription" in the view name since it shows actually statistics for
> subscriptions and subscription OID is the key. I personally prefer
> pg_stat_subscription_counters among the ideas that have been proposed
> so far, but I'd like to hear opinions and votes.
_counters will fail if there is something not a counter (such as
last-timestamp-of-something).
Earlier, pg_stat_subscription_stats was mentioned, which doesn't have
that problem.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-02-24 12:31:40 | Re: convert libpq uri-regress tests to tap test |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2022-02-24 12:19:39 | Re: convert libpq uri-regress tests to tap test |