* Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Apologies for the confusion- the client isn't using it to determine if
> > there's activity. They're using it exactly as it's intended, as I
> > understand it- to check and see if the number of
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 8:08 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> Apologies for the confusion- the client isn't using it to determine if
> there's activity. They're using it exactly as it's intended, as I
> understand it- to check and see if the number of rollbacks is
> signifigant compared to the number of
* Guillaume Lelarge (guilla...@lelarge.info) wrote:
> 2015-02-04 6:37 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane :
> > Stephen Frost writes:
> > No, somebody should fix check_postgres to count rollbacks as well as
> > commits as activity (as they obviously are).
> >
> Well, actually, no. This is a commit ratio, not an ac
2015-02-04 6:37 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane :
> Stephen Frost writes:
> > All,
> > We recently had a client complain that check_postgres' commitratio
> > check would alert about relatively unused databases. As it turns
> > out, the reason for this is because they automate running pg_dump
> > agai
Stephen Frost writes:
> All,
> We recently had a client complain that check_postgres' commitratio
> check would alert about relatively unused databases. As it turns
> out, the reason for this is because they automate running pg_dump
> against their databases (surely a good thing..), but p
All,
We recently had a client complain that check_postgres' commitratio
check would alert about relatively unused databases. As it turns
out, the reason for this is because they automate running pg_dump
against their databases (surely a good thing..), but pg_dump doesn't
close out its t
