| From: | "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bdrouvot(at)amazon(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: shared-memory based stats collector - v70 |
| Date: | 2022-08-10 12:02:34 |
| Message-ID: | 3d853c6f-445f-782e-eab0-525729952d4c@amazon.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 8/10/22 4:39 AM, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> At Tue, 9 Aug 2022 09:53:19 -0700, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote in
>> Could you try the pgstat_lock_entry_shared() approach?
> Of course. Please find the attached.
Thanks for the patch!
It looks good to me.
One nit comment though, instead of:
+ /*
+ * Take lwlock directly instead of using
pg_stat_lock_entry_shared()
+ * which requires a reference.
+ */
what about?
+ /*
+ * Acquire the LWLock directly instead of using
pg_stat_lock_entry_shared()
+ * which requires a reference.
+ */
I think that's more consistent with other comments mentioning LWLock
acquisition.
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | osumi.takamichi@fujitsu.com | 2022-08-10 12:39:29 | RE: logical replication restrictions |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2022-08-10 11:49:24 | Re: Typo in misc_sanity.sql? |