| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Staale Smedseng <Staale(dot)Smedseng(at)Sun(dot)COM> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Why are we waiting? |
| Date: | 2008-02-07 17:12:57 |
| Message-ID: | 1202404377.4247.6.camel@ebony.site |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 16:29 +0100, Staale Smedseng wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 19:55, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I am wondering if the waits are being
> > attributed to the right locks --- I remember such an error in a previous
> > set of dtrace results, and some of the other details such as claiming
> > shared lock delays but no exclusive lock delays for FirstLockMgrLock
> > seem less than credible as well.
>
> Good catch. We've checked the DTrace scripts against the respective
> versions of lwlock.h, and the FirstLockMgrLock is off (this is actually
> the results for FirstBufMappingLock).
I just realised you are using a lookup to get the text for the name of
the lock. You used the same lookup table for both releases?
--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2008-02-07 17:31:42 | Re: 8.3 / 8.2.6 restore comparison |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-02-07 17:00:33 | Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan |