Re: Small patch to replace 'idle' by 'trans' if transaction is still open
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au>
Cc: Christof Petig <christof.petig@wtal.de>, Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>, pgsql-patches@postgresql.org
Date: 2000-10-11T15:15:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au> writes: > The idea was to indicate if the process is likely to be causing a locking > problem - but now I think about it, a more useful pice of information would > be if any tables/rows/whatever are locked in such a way that another user > might be prevented from doing an update. Is this possible? Don't see how you could convey a useful amount of info in the space available. There are way too many levels of way too many locks that might or might not conflict with someone else. (Even a read-only transaction grabs read locks, so it's not like the presence or absence of any lock is sufficient info to be useful.) There was another thread recently about adding a SHOW command or some such to dump out the state of the lock manager's table in a readable form. I think that'd be a more useful thing to work on than trying to cram one or two bits' worth of info into the ps display. regards, tom lane