From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Wait event names mismatch: oldserxid |
Date: | 2018-02-09 13:53:27 |
Message-ID: | 20180209135327.GC29003@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 06:04:39PM +0530, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> Name for wait event "LWTRANCHE_OLDSERXID_BUFFERS" is printed as
> "oldserxid", but documentation at
> https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/monitoring-stats.html does
> not have exact same event there. Instead it has
>
> OldSerXidLock Waiting to read or record conflicting serializable
> transactions.
I see two events defined here in the code of type LWLock dedicated to
oldserxid:
- OldSerXidLock which is a wait event defined as it is part of
LWLockNames.
- oldserxid, which gets defined in SimpleLruInit(), which itself calls
LWLockRegisterTranche() to define a second event of type LWLock.
So the docs look correct to me on this side. What I find weird is the
phrasing to define oldserxid. Instead of that, the current description:
Waiting to I/O on an oldserxid buffer.
I would suggest "waiting *for* I/O"
A small patch is attached.
Thanks,
--
Michael
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
wait-oldserxid-def.patch | text/x-diff | 582 bytes |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2018-02-09 13:57:57 | Re: [HACKERS] FOSDEM PGDay_2018_Developer_Meeting notes |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2018-02-09 13:32:40 | Re: [HACKERS] Vacuum: allow usage of more than 1GB of work mem |