Re: auxiliary processes in pg_stat_ssl
От | Kuntal Ghosh |
---|---|
Тема | Re: auxiliary processes in pg_stat_ssl |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAGz5QCJ=5nQP7aYXOeYkjXTi2BX2u0_kmrcuPQtRAMG9oBWjPw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: auxiliary processes in pg_stat_ssl (Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 9:09 PM Euler Taveira <euler@timbira.com.br> wrote: > > > > But this seems pointless. Should we not hide those? Seems this only > > happened as an unintended side-effect of fc70a4b0df38. It appears to me > > that we should redefine that view to restrict backend_type that's > > 'client backend' (maybe include 'wal receiver'/'wal sender' also, not > > sure.) > > > Yep, it is pointless. BackendType that open connections to server are: > autovacuum worker, client backend, background worker, wal sender. I > also notice that pg_stat_gssapi is in the same boat as pg_stat_ssl and > we should constraint the rows to backend types that open connections. > I'm attaching a patch to list only connections in those system views. > Yeah, We should hide those. As Robert mentioned, I think checking whether 'client_port IS NOT NULL' is a better approach than checking the backend_type. The patch looks good to me. -- Thanks & Regards, Kuntal Ghosh EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: