Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Ildus Kurbangaliev <i(dot)kurbangaliev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>
Cc: Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive
Date: 2015-07-21 10:18:44
Message-ID: 20150721101844.GB13636@awork2.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2015-07-21 13:11:36 +0300, Ildus Kurbangaliev wrote:
>
> /*
> * Top-level transactions are identified by VirtualTransactionIDs comprising
> diff --git a/src/include/storage/lwlock.h b/src/include/storage/lwlock.h
> index cff3b99..55b0687 100644
> --- a/src/include/storage/lwlock.h
> +++ b/src/include/storage/lwlock.h
> @@ -58,6 +58,9 @@ typedef struct LWLock
> #ifdef LOCK_DEBUG
> struct PGPROC *owner; /* last exlusive owner of the lock */
> #endif
> +
> + /* LWLock group, initialized as -1, calculated in first acquire */
> + int group;
> } LWLock;

I'd very much like to avoid increasing the size of struct LWLock. We
have a lot of those and I'd still like to inline them with the buffer
descriptors. Why do we need a separate group and can't reuse the
tranche? That might require creating a few more tranches, but ...?

Andres

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alvaro Herrera 2015-07-21 10:52:20 Re: "make check" changes have caused buildfarm deterioration.
Previous Message Ildus Kurbangaliev 2015-07-21 10:11:36 Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive