Re: WAIT FOR command should do some query jumbling

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Sami Imseih <samimseih(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: sirisha chamarthi <sirichamarthi22(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alexander Korotkov <akorotkov(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: WAIT FOR command should do some query jumbling
Date: 2026-08-31 07:38:07
Message-ID: apUvXwUG5_R6FhUA@paquier.xyz
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Aug 30, 2026 at 09:56:29PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote:
> IMO, LSN and timeout are both the minimum we should normalize here.
>
> I am also not sure how tools will use this feature, but what makes timeout
> safe IMO is the fact that the "timeout" values across many executions that
> collapse into a single entry can be understood by the *_exec_time fields.

I see the traction here, but I cannot really get fully convinced by a
grouping of the timeouts without more input. As a whole, I think that
Sirisha's patch is fine enough on its own.

Adding Nathan with his RMT hat on for comments regarding a potential
backpatch to v19, so as we have a fixed query ID with v20.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2026-08-31 07:52:55 Re: [PATCH] Speed up pg_waldump TAP test and fix some GitHub CI Windows flakiness
Previous Message Ewan Young 2026-08-31 07:32:50 GRAPH_TABLE pattern WHERE clause is not coerced to boolean