Re: Verify predefined LWLocks tranches have entries in wait_event_names.txt

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Verify predefined LWLocks tranches have entries in wait_event_names.txt
Date: 2025-07-22 02:05:39
Message-ID: aH7x879y-C3fNMAq@paquier.xyz
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 08:34:41PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
> I bet we could maintain a decent level of readability with some extra
> commentary. IMHO it's worth it to avoid maintaining duplicate lists. But
> that's not something I feel terribly strong about, if others disagree.
> FWIW I was imagining something like this:
>
> typedef enum BuiltinTrancheIds
> {
> LWTRANCHE_INVALID = NUM_INDIVIDUAL_LWLOCKS - 1,

Something like that would be OK for me.
--
Michael

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2025-07-22 02:06:59 Re: teach pg_upgrade to handle in-place tablespaces
Previous Message jian he 2025-07-22 01:59:19 Re: CAST(... ON DEFAULT) - WIP build on top of Error-Safe User Functions