From: | Christian Kruse <christian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire |
Date: | 2014-01-28 08:08:35 |
Message-ID: | 20140128080835.GB26938@defunct.ch |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 27/01/14 11:44, Rajeev rastogi wrote:
> I have checked the revised patch. It looks fine to me except one minor code formatting issue.
> In elog.c, two tabs are missing in the definition of function "errdetail_log_plural".
> Please run pgindent tool to check the same.
I did, but this reformats various other locations in the file,
too. Nevertheless I now ran pg_indent against it and removed the other
parts. Attached you will find the corrected patch version.
> Also I would like to highlight one behavior here is that process ID of process trying to
> acquire lock is also listed in the list of "Request queue". E.g.
>
> session 1 with process id X: BEGIN; LOCK TABLE foo IN SHARE MODE;
> session 2 with process id Y: BEGIN; LOCK TABLE foo IN EXCLUSIVE MODE;
>
> On execution of LOCK in session-2, as part of log it will display as:
> DETAIL: Process holding the lock: X. Request queue: Y.
>
> Where Y is the process ID of same process, which was trying to acquire lock.
This is on purpose due to the rewording of the Message. In the first
version the PID of the backend was missing.
Thanks for the review!
Best regards,
--
Christian Kruse http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
show_pids_in_lock_log_v5.patch | text/x-diff | 6.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Yugo Nagata | 2014-01-28 08:38:11 | Re: Fwd: Proposal: variant of regclass |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2014-01-28 07:29:24 | Re: GIN improvements part2: fast scan |