On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Thom Brown <t...@linux.com> wrote: >> It turns out that I hate the fact that the Wait Event Name column is >> effectively in a random order. If a user sees a message, and goes to >> look up the value in the wait_event description table, they either >> have to search with their browser/PDF viewer, or scan down the list >> looking for the item they're looking for, not knowing how far down it >> will be. The same goes for wait event type. >> >> I've attached a patch to sort the list by wait event type and then >> wait event name. It also corrects minor SGML indenting issues. > > Let's try that again, this time without duplicating a row, and omitting > another.
Hmm, I'm not sure this is a good idea. I don't think it's crazy to report the locks in the order they are defined in the source code; many people will be familiar with that order, and it might make the list easier to maintain. On the other hand, I'm also not sure this is a bad idea. Alphabetical order is a widely-used standard. So, I'm going to abstain from any strong position here and ask what other people think of Thom's proposed change. -- 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
