Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20220321234519.2hevpgjwzqtbmg3e@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity
Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2022-01-14 11:25:45 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com> writes: > > Like many I previously had to investigate a slowdown due to sub-transaction > > overflow, and even with the information available in a monitoring view (I had > > to rely on a quick hackish extension as I couldn't patch postgres) it's not > > terribly fun to do this way. On top of that log analyzers like pgBadger could > > help to highlight such a problem. > > It feels to me like far too much effort is being invested in fundamentally > the wrong direction here. If the subxact overflow business is causing > real-world performance problems, let's find a way to fix that, not put > effort into monitoring tools that do little to actually alleviate anyone's > pain. There seems to be some agreement on this (I certainly do agree). Thus it seems we should mark the CF entry as rejected? It's been failing on cfbot for weeks... https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5289336424890368?logs=docs_build#L347
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: