Re: Tracking wait event for latches

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 8:38 AM, Michael Paquier
<michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:39 PM, Thomas Munro
>> <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Ok, if they really are independent then shouldn't we take advantage of
>>> that at call sites where we might be idle but we might also be waiting
>>> for the network?
>>
>> I certainly didn't intend for them to be independent, and I don't
>> think they should be. I think it should be a hierarchy - as it is
>> currently. I think it's a bad idea to introduce the notational
>> overhead of having to pass through two integers rather than one
>> everywhere, and a worse idea to encourage people to think of the
>> wait_event_type and wait_event are related any way other than
>> hierarchically.
>
> So should I change back the patch to have only one argument for the
> eventId, and guess classId from it?

Why would you need to guess? But, yes, I think one argument is much preferable.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company