Thomas Munro wrote:
> Thinking of other patches in flight, I think I'd want the proposed
> N-sync standbys feature to be able to explain in more detail what it's
> waiting for (and likewise my causal reads proposal which does that via
> the process title), though I realise that the details of how/
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On 3 December 2015 at 04:22, Julian Schauder
> wrote:
>
>>
>> I suggest adding a new state to pg_stat_activity.state for backends that
>> are
>>
>> waiting for their synchronous commit to be flushed on the remote host.
>>
>
> Excellent idea. A
Andres Freund wrote:
> On December 4, 2015 9:48:55 AM GMT+01:00, Craig Ringer
> wrote:
> >On 3 December 2015 at 22:58, Amit Kapila
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Craig Ringer
> >> wrote:
>
> >http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1+=5Ex8-5NRr3u94=_t2p65v0kcjZ5rXddVmkx=
On December 4, 2015 9:48:55 AM GMT+01:00, Craig Ringer
wrote:
>On 3 December 2015 at 22:58, Amit Kapila
>wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Craig Ringer
>> wrote:
>http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAA4eK1+=5Ex8-5NRr3u94=_t2p65v0kcjZ5rXddVmkx=lwa...@mail.gmail.com
>>
>Good point. I
On 3 December 2015 at 22:58, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Craig Ringer
> wrote:
> >
> > On 3 December 2015 at 09:32, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >>
> >> On 12/2/15 7:00 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> >> > I notice that you don't set the 'waiting' flag. 'waiting' is
> presently
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>
> On 3 December 2015 at 09:32, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>
>> On 12/2/15 7:00 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
>> > I notice that you don't set the 'waiting' flag. 'waiting' is presently
>> > documented as:
>> >
>> >True if this backend is curr
On 3 December 2015 at 09:32, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 12/2/15 7:00 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> > I notice that you don't set the 'waiting' flag. 'waiting' is presently
> > documented as:
> >
> >True if this backend is currently waiting on a lock
> >
> > ... but I'm inclined to just wid
On 12/2/15 7:00 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> I notice that you don't set the 'waiting' flag. 'waiting' is presently
> documented as:
>
>True if this backend is currently waiting on a lock
>
> ... but I'm inclined to just widen its definition and set it here, since
> we most certainly are wa
On 3 December 2015 at 04:22, Julian Schauder
wrote:
>
> I suggest adding a new state to pg_stat_activity.state for backends that
> are
> waiting for their synchronous commit to be flushed on the remote host.
> I chose 'waiting for synchronous replication' for now.
>
>
I've added this to the next
On 3 December 2015 at 04:22, Julian Schauder
wrote:
> I suggest adding a new state to pg_stat_activity.state for backends that
> are
>
waiting for their synchronous commit to be flushed on the remote host.
>
>
Excellent idea. Anything that improves management and visibility into what
the system
Hello Hackers,
I recently analyzed an incident where a major lag in synchronous replication
blocked a number of synchronous backends. I found myself looking at backends
that, according to pg_stat_activity, were neither waiting nor idle but yet they
didn't finish their work.
As it turns out, the
11 matches
Mail list logo
