Re: Fix showing XID of a spectoken lock in an incorrect field of pg_locks view.
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Fix showing XID of a spectoken lock in an incorrect field of pg_locks view. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1LaHo_85uHRtAscYNTbw6ZjZFy0tFdD7tCzXVEtxDnUwQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Fix showing XID of a spectoken lock in an incorrect field of pg_locks view. (Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Fix showing XID of a spectoken lock in an incorrect field of pg_locks view.
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 12:16 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@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? [1] - https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/view-pg-locks.html -- With Regards, Amit Kapila.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: