| From: | Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com>, Kevin K Biju <kevinkbiju(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Add new wait event to XactLockTableWait |
| Date: | 2025-06-09 03:00:35 |
| Message-ID: | CABPTF7VfqEnb6PQGQ0f+b6e7-3EBUyS0reyUK2=ptgCDX2GPwg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Just CC.
On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 10:57 AM Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Thanks for reviewing.
>
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2025 at 6:41 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> > + pgstat_report_wait_start(WAIT_EVENT_XACT_DONE);
> > [...]
> > + pgstat_report_wait_start(WAIT_EVENT_XACT_DONE);
> >
> > Wouldn't it be better to use two wait events named differently to be
> > able to make the difference between the two code paths?
> > --
>
> Both `XactLockTableWait()` and its conditional sibling ultimately
> block on the same thing: “other transaction must commit or abort
> before I can proceed.” I think that using one identifier might keep
> the catalog simple.
>
> Best regards,
> Xuneng
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Xuneng Zhou | 2025-06-09 03:37:33 | Re: Add new wait event to XactLockTableWait |
| Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2025-06-09 01:58:13 | Re: Add new wait event to XactLockTableWait |