| From: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pg_stat_statements locking |
| Date: | 2022-09-12 18:08:35 |
| Message-ID: | 20220912180835.j5hzzfka5wsdpbpf@jrouhaud |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 02:01:23PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru> writes:
> >> On 12 Sep 2022, at 18:18, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> That being
> >> said I don't know if adding a timeout would be too expensive for the lwlock
> >> infrastructure.
>
> I want to object fiercely to loading down LWLock with anything like
> timeouts. It's supposed to be "lightweight". If we get away from
> that we're just going to find ourselves needing another lighter-weight
> lock mechanism.
That's what I was thinking, so it looks like a show-stopper for the proposed
patch.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2022-09-12 18:46:47 | Re: Fix broken link to FreeBSD DocProj in docs |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-09-12 18:01:49 | Re: PostgreSQL 15 release announcement draft |