Re: ps_status on fastpath
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2010-12-17T19:25:17Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of vie dic 17 12:41:06 -0300 2010: >> Hm, what about pgstat_report_activity()? > I wasn't sure about that, because of the overhead, but now that I look > at it, it's supposed to be cheaper than changing the ps_status in some > cases, so I guess there's no harm. Yeah, if we can afford a possible kernel call to set ps status, it doesn't seem like pgstat_report_activity should be a problem. I'm also of the opinion that more people look at pg_stat_activity than ps output these days. regards, tom lane