From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(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: | 2016-09-28 06:40:52 |
Message-ID: | CAEepm=3mBhhSSsTbqM2Et2-GEkGVbqMiCG3udMFAv47nZgHZpA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> wait-event-set-v8.patch
Ok, I'm just about ready to mark this as 'Ready for Committer'. Just
a couple of things:
+ pgstat_report_wait_start((uint8) classId, (uint16) eventId);
Unnecessary casts.
+ <row>
+ <entry morerows="5"><literal>Client</></entry>
+ <entry><literal>SecureRead</></entry>
+ <entry>Waiting to read data from a secure connection.</entry>
+ </row>
+ <row>
+ <entry><literal>SecureWrite</></entry>
+ <entry>Waiting to write data to a secure connection.</entry>
+ </row>
I think we want to drop the word 'secure' from the description lines
in this patch. Then I think we plan to make a separate patch that
will rename the functions themselves and the corresponding wait points
to something more generic?
I'm assuming that my suggestions for making WE_WAL_SENDER_WAIT_WAL and
WE_WAL_SENDER_MAIN have a dynamically chosen class ID would also be
material for another patch, but it doesn't matter much because those
processes won't show up yet anyway.
--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-09-28 06:45:08 | Re: PATCH: Exclude additional directories in pg_basebackup |
Previous Message | Piotr Stefaniak | 2016-09-28 06:40:45 | Re: LLVM Address Sanitizer (ASAN) and valgrind support |