On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 6:42 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 12:16 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > It seems to be confusing and the user won't get the result even if > > they search it by transactionid = 741. So I've attached the patch to > > fix it. With the patch, the pg_locks views shows like: > > > > locktype | database | relation | page | tuple | virtualxid | > > transactionid | classid | objid | objsubid | virtualtransaction | pid > > | mode | granted | fastpath | waitstart > > -----------+----------+----------+------+-------+------------+---------------+---------+-------+----------+--------------------+--------+---------------+---------+----------+----------- > > spectoken | | | | | | > > 746 | | 1 | | 3/4 | 535618 | > > ExclusiveLock | t | f | > > (1 row) > > > > Is it a good idea to display spec token as objid, if so, how will > users know? Currently for Advisory locks, we display values in > classid, objid, objsubid different than the original meaning of fields > but those are explained in docs [1]. Wouldn't it be better to mention > this in docs?
Agreed. Attached the updated patch. Regards, -- Masahiko Sawada Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
v2-0001-Fix-showing-transaction-id-of-a-spectoken-in-an-i.patch
Description: Binary data
