On 31/12/13 13:56, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> I think that this is a worthwhile effort, but like Tom I don't think
> that it's universally true that these waiters are waiting on a tuple
> lock. Most obviously, the XactLockTableWait() call you've modified
> within nbtinsert.c is not.

This is why I don't set the tuple data in this case:

     XactLockTableWaitSetupErrorContextCallback(rel, NULL);

The second argument is the tuple argument. If it is set to NULL in the
error context callback, all output regarding tuple are suppressed.

> ISTM that you should be printing just the value and the unique index
> there, and not any information about the tuple proper.

Good point, I will have a look at this.

> For better direction about where that new
> infrastructure ought to live, you might find some useful insight from
> commit 991f3e5ab3f8196d18d5b313c81a5f744f3baaea.

Thanks for the pointer!

But, to be honest, I am still unsure where to put this. As far as I
understand this commit has substantial parts in relcache.c and
elog.c – both don't seem to be very good fitting places?


 Christian Kruse               http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Attachment: pgpFTITwzCXuK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to