Re: We should lazy-initialize the deadlock checker state memory

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: We should lazy-initialize the deadlock checker state memory
Date: 2025-06-06 00:01:30
Message-ID: 1347009.1749168090@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> ISTM that we could move the call to InitDeadLockChecking() to the start of
> CheckDeadLock(), before it acquires all the locks. That'd require making it
> safe to call InitDeadLockChecking() multiple times, but that's obviously
> trivial.

Hmph. Do we even need that to be persistent storage at all, rather
than just allocating it for the duration of CheckDeadLock?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2025-06-06 00:05:20 Re: Retiring some encodings?
Previous Message Andres Freund 2025-06-05 23:53:40 We should lazy-initialize the deadlock checker state memory