Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster.

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Andrey M(dot) Borodin" <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster.
Date: 2020-05-12 20:10:18
Message-ID: CA+TgmobwJi561ioqUaeA1ARih3g2TzzTXXazu-3TqyvS-W12kg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 4:00 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Said user-facing documentation largely fails to explain that the
> set of wait events can be enlarged by extensions; that needs to
> be fixed, too.

Is that true? How can they do that? I thought they were stuck with
PG_WAIT_EXTENSION.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2020-05-12 20:12:37 Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster.
Previous Message Robert Haas 2020-05-12 20:08:54 Re: Our naming of wait events is a disaster.