On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 3:10 AM, and...@anarazel.de <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > I do think there's a considerable benefit in improving the > instrumentation here, but his strikes me as making live more complex for > more users than it makes it easier. At the very least this should be > split into two fields (type & what we're actually waiting on). I also > strongly suspect we shouldn't use in band signaling ("process not > waiting"), but rather make the field NULL if we're not waiting on > anything.
+1 for splitting it into two fields. Regarding making the field NULL, someone (I think you) proposed previously that we should have one field indicating whether we are waiting, and a separate field (or two) indicating the current or most recent wait event. That would be similar to how pg_stat_activity.{query,state} work. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers