Horton

Re: IDLE in transaction introspection

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org>
Cc: Scott Mead <scottm@openscg.com>, Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>, "Andrew Dunstan *EXTERN*" <andrew@dunslane.net>, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-11-04T13:42:02Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org> writes:
> While we're already breaking everything, we could remove the "waiting"
> column and use a state with value 'waiting' instead.

-1 ... I think it's useful to see the underlying state as well as the
waiting flag.  Also, this would represent breakage of part of the API
that doesn't need to be broken.

> Also, returning these as text seems a little lame. Should there be an
> enum type for that?

Perhaps, but we don't really use enum types in any other system views,
so inventing one here would be out of character.

			regards, tom lane