On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2015-06-25 16:26:39 +0530, Amit Kapila wrote: > > Won't leaving former contents as it is (until the next thing is being > > blocked) could give misleading information. Currently we mark 'waiting' > > as false as soon as Heavy Weight Lock is over, so following that way > > sounds more appropriate, is there any reason why you want it differently > > than what we are doing currently? > > But we don't do the same for query, so I don't think that says much. I > think it'd be useful because it gives you a bit more chance to see what > you blocked on last, even if the time the backend was blocked was very > short. >
Sure, that's another way to look at it, if you and or others feels that is better, then we can follow that way. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
