Re: Tracking wait event for latches

From: Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Tracking wait event for latches
Date: 2016-09-21 14:23:30
Message-ID: CAB7nPqS1+qT6dYctO9HDbTJ=cYVNohz4mz0tSpOH-1nzzCKJVg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 11:18 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> No, that's not what I want to do. I think we should categorize the
> events administratively by their main purpose, rather than
> technologically by what we're waiting for.

So we'd just have three class IDs instead of one? Well why not.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2016-09-21 14:31:30 Re: Tracking wait event for latches
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-09-21 14:22:37 Re: Quorum commit for multiple synchronous replication.