Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Amit Kapila
Тема Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive
Дата
Msg-id CAA4eK1LX=VnWChZAisV_-jwngh1MPtR=Lo4yt-RRhexo1U_oUA@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive  (Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive  (Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the wait event types should be documented - and the wait
> events too, perhaps.
>

As discussed upthread, I have added documentation for all the possible wait events and an example.  Some of the LWLocks like AsyncQueueLock and AsyncCtlLock are used for quite similar purpose, so I have kept there explanation as same.

Do you think it worth grouping rows in "wait_event Description" table by wait event type?

They are already grouped (implicitly), do you mean to say that we should add wait event type name as well in that table? If yes, then the only slight worry is that there will lot of repetition in wait_event_type column, otherwise it is okay.


With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tomas Vondra
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: improving GROUP BY estimation
Следующее
От: Thom Brown
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive