On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 15:42, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Marti Raudsepp <ma...@juffo.org> writes: >> While we're already breaking everything, we could remove the "waiting" >> column and use a state with value 'waiting' instead.
> -1 ... I think it's useful to see the underlying state as well as the > waiting flag. Also, this would represent breakage of part of the API > that doesn't need to be broken. Well the waiting column can stay. My concern is that listing lock-wait backends as 'running' will be misleading for users. pg_stat_activity is a pretty common starting point for debugging problems and if there's a new column that says a query is 'running', then I'm afraid the current waiting 't' and 'f' values will be too subtle for users to notice. (I find that it's too subtle already now, if you don't know what you're looking for). Regards, Marti -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
