On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 4:19 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >>> Why would we need to backpatch this commit? > >> You are right there is no need to get that into 9.6. Sorry for the mistake. > > Oh, that's my fault, I'd incorrectly remembered this commit as having been > further back than it was. HEAD-only is correct so far as fixing > Fujii-san's original complaint is concerned. However, don't we have the > problem that am_db_walsender processes will show up in pg_stat_activity > anyway?
Yes, those show up.. > Do we want to do something about those further back? Hiding them is not something that we should do, and changing the query field to show something that we think is helpful may impact existing applications that rely on the fact that this field is NULL. So I'd vote for doing nothing. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
