Re: Improve LWLock tranche name visibility across backends

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Improve LWLock tranche name visibility across backends
Date: 2025-08-22 21:33:55
Message-ID: 2151672.1755898435@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> One point I did not make earlier is that the tranche name lengths will
> need to be as long as we allow in dsm_registry.c.

> #define DSMR_NAME_LEN 128

Huh. Why is that different from NAMEDATALEN in the first place?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2025-08-22 21:48:07 [18+] improve upgrade pre-check for Unicode updates
Previous Message Sami Imseih 2025-08-22 20:49:38 Re: Improve LWLock tranche name visibility across backends