On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Joel Jacobson <j...@trustly.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, this was discussed. If we keep the Boolean "waiting" column, then either: > > Oh, sorry for missing out on that discussion. > > > 1. We make it true only for heavyweight lock waits, and false for > > other kinds of waits. That's pretty strange. > > 2. We make it true for all kinds of waits that we now know how to > > report. That still breaks compatibility. > > Why not 3: We make it true for exactly the same type of situations as > in previous versions. Or is it not possible to do so for some reason? >
Thats exactly the first point (1) of Robert. One thing that will be strange according to me is that in some cases where waiting will be false, but still wait_event and wait_event_type contain some wait information and I think that will look odd to anybody new looking at the view. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
