| From: | Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Lock Wait Statistics (next commitfest) |
| Date: | 2009-10-03 23:22:03 |
| Message-ID: | 4AC7DC9B.9060904@paradise.net.nz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Janes wrote:
>
> The total wait time is equal to the max wait time (which are both
> equal to l_end)?
> One or both of those has to end up being wrong. At this stage, is
> l_end supposed to be the last wait time, or the cumulative wait time?
>
>
>
Hmm - I may well have fat fingered the arithmetic, thanks I'll take a look!
> One of the things in the patch review checklist is about compiler
> warnings, so I am reporting these:
>
> lock.c: In function `LockAcquire':
> lock.c:797: warning: passing arg 1 of `pgstat_init_lock_wait' discards
> qualifiers from pointer target type
> lock.c:802: warning: passing arg 1 of `pgstat_end_lock_wait' discards
> qualifiers from pointer target type
>
>
>
>
Right, will look at too.
Cheers
Mark
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2009-10-04 00:51:33 | Re: SELECT ... FOR UPDATE [WAIT integer | NOWAIT] for 8.5 |
| Previous Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2009-10-03 23:14:55 | Re: Lock Wait Statistics (next commitfest) |