On 3 December 2015 at 09:32, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On 12/2/15 7:00 PM, Craig Ringer wrote: > > I notice that you don't set the 'waiting' flag. 'waiting' is presently > > documented as: > > > > <entry>True if this backend is currently waiting on a lock</entry> > > > > ... but I'm inclined to just widen its definition and set it here, since > > we most certainly are waiting, and the column isn't named > > 'waiting_on_a_lock'. It shouldn't upset various canned lock monitoring > > queries people have since they generally do an inner join on pg_locks > > anyway. > > I'm not so sure about that assumption. > Even if it's an outer join, the worst that'll happen is that they'll get entries with nulls in pg_locks. I don't think it's worth worrying about too much. We could always mitigate it by adding a pg_lock_status view to the system catalogs with a decent canned query over pg_stat_activity and pg_locks, so people can stop copying & pasting from the wiki or using buggy homebrew queries ;) -- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
