From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: procpid? |
Date: | 2011-06-15 14:31:04 |
Message-ID: | BANLkTino=7bxm9r-aRbQwWTEW2PUKtm_kQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:44 AM, Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Why not expose this new information as functions instead of a new view, like
> we do for pg_is_in_replication(). People can use whatever alias they want in
> the queries they write.
>
> SELECT get_current_query(pid), is_idle(pid), is_idle_in_transaction(pid),
> transaction_start_time(pid), .... FROM (select procpid as pid FROM
> pg_stat_activity);
>
> Then pg_activity (or whatever we name it later) would also be a view on top
> of these functions.
Well, that would probably be a lot slower, and wouldn't necessarily
deliver as consistent a snapshot of system activity. It's better to
have one set-returning function that dumps out all the data in a
single pass.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2011-06-15 15:19:29 | Re: procpid? |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2011-06-15 14:29:02 | Re: procpid? |