On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>> One idea is, calling pgstat_report_activity(STATE_IDLE) in
>>> exec_execute_message() of postgres.c. The function has already called
>>> pgstat_report_activity(STATE_RUNNING) which shows "active" state in
>>> pg_stat_actviity view. So why can
>> The query is piggy backed on the same connection to PostgreSQL opend
>> by user (pgpool-II cannot issue "sync" because it closes the
>> transaction, which in turn closes user's unnamed portal).
>
> This argument (and usage) seems pretty broken. If you don't issue
> sync then how do you know yo
Tatsuo Ishii writes:
>> The argument here could be do we really need a new state for such a short
>> window between completion of 'E' message and processing of 'S' sync
>> message considering updation of state is not a very light call which can
>> be called between processing of 2 messages. It mig
>> One idea is, calling pgstat_report_activity(STATE_IDLE) in
>> exec_execute_message() of postgres.c. The function has already called
>> pgstat_report_activity(STATE_RUNNING) which shows "active" state in
>> pg_stat_actviity view. So why cann't we call
>> pgstat_report_activity(STATE_IDLE) here.
>
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> I think that is the probable reason for the above mentioned behaviour.
>> As I understand here, the problem is that 'state' of backend is shown as
>> active along with 'query' which according to docs (If state is active this
>> field
>> show
> I think that is the probable reason for the above mentioned behaviour.
> As I understand here, the problem is that 'state' of backend is shown as
> active along with 'query' which according to docs (If state is active this
> field
> shows the currently executing query.) means that query is execu
On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>> As you can see, at 2014-02-04 12:47:27.210981+09 the query "SELECT
>> count(*) FROM pg_catalog.pg_class..." is "active" and it seems still
>> running.
>>
>> On the other side, Here is an e
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> As you can see, at 2014-02-04 12:47:27.210981+09 the query "SELECT
> count(*) FROM pg_catalog.pg_class..." is "active" and it seems still
> running.
>
> On the other side, Here is an excerpt from PostgreSQL log:
>
> 21850 2014-02-04 12:47:11.24
I found an interesting inconsistency between pg_stat_activity and
log_duration.
-[ RECORD 1
]+---
datid| 16392
datname | test
pid | 21815
u
