On Jan 30, 2007, at 6:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
"Simon Riggs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I'm thinking to write an INFO message, so that people can choose
this and/or the SQL statement if they choose.
e.g. INFO: lock wait time of XXX secs has been exceeded
The available timer resources are already overloaded; adding an
independent timeout for this will complicate the code more than seems
justified. Perhaps you could add a LOG message whenever the
deadlock-check code runs (and doesn't detect an error, so is about
back to sleep). This would take almost no effort, and the granularity
could still be adjusted via the deadlock check timeout.
Sybase collected performance information for a server by periodically
checking the status of all backend processes (ie: waiting on a user
lock, waiting on IO, internal lock, etc) and keeping counters. Having
that information available was useful for debugging performance
issues (unfortunately I can't provide any specific examples since it
was years ago I played with it). I'm thinking backends could set
flags in shared memory to indicate what they're doing and a process
could poll that every X milliseconds and keep stats on what's going on.
But maybe that's more along the lines of the rewrite of the stats
system that's been talked about...
Jim Nasby [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster