Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity - proc id

2013-10-07 Thread Jov
we set the application_name to some unique id such as client process ID or processid#threadid when client Start the new session. jov 在 2013-10-7 上午10:39,"Rajagopalan, Jayashree" 写道: > Hi: > > ** ** > > How to correlate the procpid in pg_stat activity table to any application > process? I nee

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity - proc id

2013-10-06 Thread Sergey Konoplev
On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 7:38 PM, Rajagopalan, Jayashree wrote: > How to correlate the procpid in pg_stat activity table to any application > process? I need to track down some connections to the queries/application > threads. Please help!! Note down the client_port from pg_stat_activity and run:

[ADMIN] pg_stat_activity - proc id

2013-10-06 Thread Rajagopalan, Jayashree
Hi: How to correlate the procpid in pg_stat activity table to any application process? I need to track down some connections to the queries/application threads. Please help!! Regards Jayashree

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity howto

2009-11-05 Thread raf
Kevin Grittner wrote: > If a query is currently running, you will see the start of it. If no > query is running on a connection, the connection will show '' or > ' in transaction' depending on whether the client has started a > database transaction on that connection. While a transaction remains

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity reporting of VACUUM in 8.1

2009-07-24 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Kevin Kempter wrote: > Hi all; > > looking at a system running 8.1.15 > via a select from pg_stat_activity I see a row where the vcurrent_query = > 'VACUUM' > > I see also that autovacuum is on. Would autovacuum be running a vacuum on the > entire db? I didn't think autovacuum did that. If not,

[ADMIN] pg_stat_activity reporting of VACUUM in 8.1

2009-07-23 Thread Kevin Kempter
Hi all; looking at a system running 8.1.15 via a select from pg_stat_activity I see a row where the vcurrent_query = 'VACUUM' I see also that autovacuum is on. Would autovacuum be running a vacuum on the entire db? I didn't think autovacuum did that. If not, how do I know in version 8.1 what t

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-04-05 Thread Jim Nasby
On Apr 4, 2006, at 1:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote: "Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: It is probably related to something we've been seeing in the PostgreSQL logs on the Windows servers: [2006-04-03 08:28:25.990 ] 2072 FATAL: could not read from statistics collector pipe: No error [20

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-04-05 Thread Jim Nasby
On Apr 3, 2006, at 12:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote: "Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Is there any way to tweak this in favor of more accurate information, even if has a performance cost? We're finding that during normal operations we're not seeing most connections added to the pg_stat_act

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-04-05 Thread Lane Van Ingen
- From: Tom Lane [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 3:52 PM To: Lane Van Ingen Cc: Kevin Grittner; Jerry Sievers; pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Peter Brant Subject: Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes "Lane Van Ingen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-04-04 Thread Lane Van Ingen
IL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tom Lane Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 1:29 AM To: Kevin Grittner Cc: Jerry Sievers; pgsql-admin@postgresql.org; Peter Brant Subject: Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes "Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It is probably related to

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-04-04 Thread Tom Lane
"Lane Van Ingen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Don't understand the 'target machine' message, either; in this case, we are > running the application and the database server on the same box. > 2006-04-04 03:12:05 FATAL: could not read from statistics collector pipe: > No error 2006-04-04 03:12:06

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-04-03 Thread Tom Lane
"Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It is probably related to something we've been seeing in the PostgreSQL > logs on the Windows servers: > [2006-04-03 08:28:25.990 ] 2072 FATAL: could not read from statistics > collector pipe: No error > [2006-04-03 08:28:26.068 ] 2012 LOG: statisti

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-04-03 Thread Kevin Grittner
>>> On Mon, Apr 3, 2006 at 11:52 am, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Is there any way to tweak this in favor of more accurate information, >> even if has a performance cost? We're finding that during normal >> o

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-04-03 Thread Tom Lane
"Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Is there any way to tweak this in favor of more accurate information, > even if has a performance cost? We're finding that during normal > operations we're not seeing most connections added to the > pg_stat_activity table. We would like to be able to

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-04-03 Thread Kevin Grittner
>>> On Sat, Mar 25, 2006 at 8:40 pm, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jerry Sievers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> At any rate; I'm wondering what possible causes might be responsible >> for pg_stat_activity's underlying functions to lose track of the valid >>

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-03-26 Thread Jerry Sievers
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jerry Sievers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > At any rate; I'm wondering what possible causes might be responsible > > for pg_stat_activity's underlying functions to lose track of the valid > > process list? > > It sounds like the stats collector missed a fe

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-03-25 Thread Tom Lane
Jerry Sievers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > At any rate; I'm wondering what possible causes might be responsible > for pg_stat_activity's underlying functions to lose track of the valid > process list? It sounds like the stats collector missed a few "backend quit" messages. This isn't real surpri

[ADMIN] pg_stat_activity showing non-existent processes

2006-03-25 Thread Jerry Sievers
Hello; Briefly, we've been fighting an "old idle transaction" problem on our Pg 8.0.3 Solaris 2.9 production system for a long time. This is due to some quirks in our app server code (to be fixed ASAP ). Hourly we run a script that SIGTERMs all backends reported as being in idle transaction state

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity

2006-02-02 Thread Cédric BUSCHINI
Brad Nicholson a écrit : Cédric BUSCHINI wrote: Hello, question in 2 times : 1 - "select * from pg_stat_activity ;" gives me serverals lines but all lines have in current_query I have set "stats_command_string" to true... Have you restarted the postmaster since making the change? This

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity

2006-02-02 Thread Tom Lane
Brad Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Cédric BUSCHINI wrote: >> 1 - "select * from pg_stat_activity ;" gives me serverals lines but >> all lines have in current_query >> I have set "stats_command_string" to true... >> > Have you restarted the postmaster since making the change? This sett

Re: [ADMIN] pg_stat_activity

2006-02-02 Thread Brad Nicholson
Cédric BUSCHINI wrote: Hello, question in 2 times : 1 - "select * from pg_stat_activity ;" gives me serverals lines but all lines have in current_query I have set "stats_command_string" to true... Have you restarted the postmaster since making the change? This setting requires restart (r

[ADMIN] pg_stat_activity

2006-02-02 Thread Cédric BUSCHINI
Hello, question in 2 times : 1 - "select * from pg_stat_activity ;" gives me serverals lines but all lines have in current_query I have set "stats_command_string" to true... 2 - I wanna to log users activity : connections, disconnection, queries, ... I assume there is a good way to do that