On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > * Robert Haas (robertmh...@gmail.com) wrote: >> Well, the flip side is that if you have appropriate logging turned on, >> you might be able to go back and look at what the transaction that >> took the lock actually did, which won't be possible if you arbitrarily >> throw the PID away. > > What'd be horribly useful would be the pid and the *time* that the lock > was taken.. Knowing just the pid blows, since the pid could technically > end up reused (tho not terribly likely) in the time frame you're trying > to figure out what happened during..
Well, I don't think we're likely to redesign pg_locks at this point, so it's a question of making the best use of the fields we have to work with. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
