Thank you for feedback.
On 26.08.2013 22:20, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
1. this assumes there is only one holder, which is not correct.
(Consider two backends holding shared lock on something and another one
stuck trying to acquire exclusive)
Hmm, true. Then it's not that simple as I thought in first place.
I guess it is possible to find all those backends that are holding that
shared lock, but i'm not sure about the usefulness anymore as this list
can be huge.
2. I think pgstat_get_backend_current_activity() can be helpful.
Yes, I saw that function, but i also wanted tx start time.
3. Doesn't this risk excessive overhead?
About the overhead, i may be wrong, but i was thinking that that
particular backend will be put to sleep anyway and also in normal
workload such log messages are not very common (or at least shouldn't be).
Can the other backends be gone
(or done with the lock) before the report has completed? If this
happens, is there a problem?
That's why i have added check if other backend is found etc, but maybe i
missed something. This is one of reasons why i wanted feedback.
Regards
Tarvi Pillessaar
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
