Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity
От | Dilip Kumar |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFiTN-so81T2dSD_BHU5hBVMjgH61o=r_4DLXF4xBRQirpbb+w@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Add sub-transaction overflow status in pg_stat_activity (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 7:34 PM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 4:17 PM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote: > > Perhaps this would better be tackled by a new "visibility" view. It could show > > - number of sessions with a snapshot > > - max age of backend xmin > > - pid with max backend xmin > > - number of sessions that suboverflowed > > - pid of the session with the most subxids > > - age of the oldest prepared xact > > - age of the oldest slot > > - age of the oldest walsender > > - ... > > > > Perhaps implemented in SQL, with new functions for accessing the properties we > > don't expose today. That'd address the pg_stat_activity width, while still > > allowing very granular access when necessary. And provide insight into > > something that's way to hard to query right now. > > I wouldn't be against a pg_stat_visibility view, but I don't think I'd > want it to just output a single summary row. I think we really need to > give people an easy way to track down which session is the problem; > the existence of the problem is already obvious from the SLRU-related > wait events. > Even I feel per backend-wise information would be more useful and easy to use instead of a single summary row. I think It's fine to create a new view if we do not want to add more members to the existing view. -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: