Re: 'Waiting on lock'

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: 'Waiting on lock'
Date: 2007-05-30 15:39:35
Message-ID: 20070530153934.GY7531@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Tom Lane (tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us) wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> writes:
> > It'd be nice to have a NOTICE printed when a wait-on-lock takes longer
> > than a few seconds.
>
> It'd be relatively painless to make that happen as part of the
> deadlock-check timeout function, but that's typically only a one-second
> delay not a "few seconds". I think it'd likely be overly chatty.

Yeah, I wouldn't want one per second. Do we already track how long
we've been waiting? Easy enough to % off that if we do, or just have a
local boolean variable of "have we printed the wait-on-lock notice yet?"
and only print it once when we first drop into the timeout function.

I really was thinking it'd only be printed once since I expect this to
be going to an interactive session where someone's going to notice a
'NOTICE' being sent. I could maybe see another message when we actually
aquire the lock being sent if we've sent the 'wait-on-lock' message.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2007-05-30 15:57:17 Postmaster startup messages
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-05-30 15:27:57 Re: 'Waiting on lock'