Re: Need help understanding pg_locks

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Maybe we could just add a paragraph above the "pg_locks Columns" table
>> that says explicitly that virtualtransaction and pid describe the entity
>> holding or awaiting the lock, and the others describe the object being
>> locked? Any way you slice it, putting this information into the
>> per-column table is going to be repetitive.

> Frankly, whenever anyone says "object", they might as well call it
> "thing". It seems to be a content-less word. Maybe just replace the
> word "object" with "lock".

No, because that conflates the lock with the thing being locked.
Fuzzing that semantic difference isn't going to make it less confusing.

regards, tom lane