From: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Autogenerate some wait events code and documentation |
Date: | 2024-03-19 07:34:09 |
Message-ID: | Zfk/8fgYtqU+bicI@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 09:59:35AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 05:57:02PM +0000, Bertrand Drouvot wrote:
> > Thanks for looking at it!
> > Oh right, the comment is wrong, re-worded in v2 attached.
>
> I've added a couple of fake events in my txt file, and this results in
> an ordering of the wait events in the docs while the backpatched wait
> events are added at the end of the enums, based on their order in the
> txt file.
Thanks for testing!
> # When adding a new wait event, make sure it is placed in the appropriate
> -# ClassName section.
> +# ClassName section. If the wait event is backpatched from master to a version
> +# >= 17 then put it under a "Backpatch:" delimiter at the end of the related
> +# ClassName section (on the non master branches) or at its natural position on
> +# the master branch.
> +# Ensure that the backpatch regions are always empty on the master branch.
>
> I'd recommend to not mention a version number at all, as this would
> need a manual refresh each time a new stable branch is forked.
I'm not sure as v2 used the "version >= 17" wording which I think would not need
manual refresh each time a new stable branch is forked.
But to avoid any doubt, I'm following your recommendation in v3 attached (then
only mentioning the "master branch" and "any other branch").
> Your solution is simpler than what I finished in mind when looking at
> the code yesterday, with the addition of a second array that's pushed
> to be at the end of the "sorted" lines ordered by the second column.
> That does the job.
Yeah.
> (Note that I'll go silent for some time; I'll handle this thread when
> I get back as this is not urgent.)
Right and enjoy!
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v3-0001-Add-Backpatch-regions-in-wait_event_names.txt.patch | text/x-diff | 5.8 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2024-03-19 07:39:53 | Re: A problem about partitionwise join |
Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2024-03-19 07:08:21 | Re: DOCS: add helpful partitioning links |