On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 2:12 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> > 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.
> >
>
> I will take care of this.
>As discussed, I have added a new field wait_event_type along with wait_event in pg_stat_activity. Changed the code return NULL, if backend is not waiting. Updated the docs as well. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
extend_pg_stat_activity_v9.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
