Re: pgsql: Further dtrace adjustments for the backend-IDs-in-relpath patch.
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgsql: Further dtrace adjustments for the backend-IDs-in-relpath patch. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2336.1281896098@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgsql: Further dtrace adjustments for the backend-IDs-in-relpath patch. (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: pgsql: Further dtrace adjustments for the
backend-IDs-in-relpath patch.
|
Список | pgsql-committers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Hrm, this doesn't look right at all. > Aargh. I thought I had checked this pretty carefully before > committing that last patch. No, sorry, my mistake: I assumed your first commit hadn't touched the probes at all, which I now see wasn't true. It does appear to be consistent now. > buffer-flush-start and buffer-flush-done are documented as only > getting called for shared buffers, so there is no point in passing a > backend ID that will always be -1. buffer-write-dirty-start and > buffer-write-dirty-done are not documented as applying only to shared > buffers, but I believe it to be the case: they are called from > BufferAlloc, which appears to be shared-buffers-only code. I wonder though whether we should take the opportunity to generalize the probe definitions so that they would work for local buffers. But maybe nobody really cares. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-committers по дате отправления: