On 4/14/14, 12:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
One concrete reason not to do the proposed trivial hack is that the lock
readout views are asynchronous.  Right now, if someone sees a process that
claims to be waiting but they don't see any entry in pg_locks, they know
they saw inconsistent state.  If we add a valid state where waiting can be
true without a pg_locks entry, they won't know what to think.  I don't
want to go there.


FWIW, I really wish we had a way to eliminate that inconsistency. It makes 
already difficult to debug problems even harder to deal with.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect                       j...@nasby.net
512.569.9461 (cell)                         http://jim.nasby.net


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to