Re: Drop back the redundant "Lock" suffix from LWLock wait event names

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>
To: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Drop back the redundant "Lock" suffix from LWLock wait event names
Date: 2024-12-02 13:22:49
Message-ID: 202412021322.s6b2objq26mv@alvherre.pgsql
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2024-Dec-02, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:

> Hi hackers,
>
> da952b415f unintentionally added back the "Lock" suffix into the LWLock wait
> event names:
>
> - "added back" because the "Lock" suffix was removed in 14a9101091
> - "unintentionally" because there is nothing in the thread [2] that explicitly
> mentions that the idea was also to revert 14a9101091

Oh, you're right, this was unintentional and unnoticed. I'll push this
shortly, to both 17 and master.

--
Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrey M. Borodin 2024-12-02 13:28:24 Re: Using read stream in autoprewarm
Previous Message Kirill Reshke 2024-12-02 13:16:56 Re: Using read stream in autoprewarm