On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 3:30 AM, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote:
> Hi,
> On 2016-02-04 21:43:14 +0000, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Change the way that LWLocks for extensions are allocated.
>> The previous RequestAddinLWLocks() method had several disadvantages.
>> First, the locks would be in the main tranche; we've recently decided
>> that it's useful for LWLocks used for separate purposes to have
>> separate tranche IDs.  Second, there wasn't any correlation between
>> what code called RequestAddinLWLocks() and what code called
>> LWLockAssign(); when multiple modules are in use, it could become
>> quite difficult to troubleshoot problems where LWLockAssign() ran out
>> of locks.  To fix, create a concept of named LWLock tranches which
>> can be used either by extension or by core code.
>> Amit Kapila and Robert Haas
> I noticed that this code has no test coverage:
> http://coverage.postgresql.org/src/backend/storage/lmgr/lwlock.c.gcov.html
> It'd be good to add some, although I'm not entirely sure what the best
> way is. Maybe add a simple pg_stat_statements test?

That would also have the advantage of improving the test coverage for
pg_stat_statements, which is at the moment quite a bit thinner than
the coverage for lwlock.c.

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:

Reply via email to