From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, MauMau <maumau307(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: sync process names between ps and pg_stat_activity |
Date: | 2017-09-20 12:59:56 |
Message-ID: | d94a24e6-b15e-87a1-4541-6354d6443087@2ndquadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/19/17 21:30, Tsunakawa, Takayuki wrote:
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
>> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Peter Eisentraut
>>> Personally, I prefer "wal writer", "wal sender" and "wal receiver"
>>> that separate words as other process names. But I don't mind leaving
>>> them as they are now.
>>
>> If we were to change those, that would break existing queries for
>> pg_stat_activity. That's new in PG10, so we could change it if we were
>> really eager. But it's probably not worth bothering. Then again, there
>> is pg_stat_wal_receiver. So it's all totally inconsistent. Not sure
>> where to go.
>
> OK, I'm comfortable with as it is now.
>
> I made this ready for committer. You can fix the following and commit the patch. Thank you.
Committed. Thank you.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-09-20 12:59:58 | Re: Error: dsa_area could not attach to a segment that has been freed |
Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2017-09-20 12:59:03 | Re: psql - add ability to test whether a variable exists |