Re: LOCK_DEBUG is busted
| От | Bruce Momjian |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: LOCK_DEBUG is busted |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 201111102205.pAAM5wc04228@momjian.us обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | LOCK_DEBUG is busted (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas wrote: > Now, whether or not this facility is well designed is a worthwhile > question. Trace_lock_oidmin seems pretty sketchy to me, especially > because it's blindly applied to even to lock tags where the second > field isn't a relation - i.e. SET_LOCKTAG_TRANSACTION sets it to zero, > SET_LOCKTAG_VIRTUALTRANSACTION sets it to the localTransactionId, > SET_LOCKTAG_OBJECT sets it to the classId member of the objectaddress, > and advisory locks set it to 32 bits of the user's chosen locktag. So > by default, with trace_userlocks turned on and no other changes, > pg_advisory_lock(16384,0) produces output like that shown above and > pg_advisory_lock(16383,0) is met with silence. So maybe we should > just rip some or all of this stuff out instead of worrying too much > about it. Please rip out whatever I missed. Thanks. The user locks were the old lock type before we had advisor locks, as far as I remember. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: