Horton

Re: exposing wait events for non-backends (was: Tracking wait event for latches)

Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Kuntal Ghosh <kuntalghosh.2007@gmail.com>, Amit Langote <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@gmail.com>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2017-03-09T19:30:21Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Perhaps I'm confused by the title of this thread/CF entry, but
background workers already do show up in pg_stat_activity.  (You can
verify that by testing the background sessions patch.)  So which
additional things are we aiming to see with this?

In practice, I think it's common to do a quick select * from
pg_stat_activity to determine whether a database instance is in use.
(You always see your own session, but that's easy to eyeball.)  If we
add all the various background processes by default, that will make
things harder, especially if there is no straightforward way to filter
them out.

Perhaps a pg_stat_user_* and pg_stat_system_* split like we have for
some of the statistics tables would be useful?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Show more processes in pg_stat_activity.