Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-03-12 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Rajeev rastogi rajeev.rast...@huawei.com wrote: On 04 February 2014 14:38, Myself wrote: On 4th February 2014, Christian kruse Wrote: On 04/02/14 12:38, Fujii Masao wrote: ISTM that the phrase Request queue is not used much around the lock. Using the

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-03-12 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi, On 13/03/14 03:27, Fujii Masao wrote: Committed! Thank you very much! Best regards, -- Christian Kruse http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training Services pgpkDoVMmXIL4.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-02-24 Thread Rajeev rastogi
On 04 February 2014 14:38, Myself wrote: On 4th February 2014, Christian kruse Wrote: On 04/02/14 12:38, Fujii Masao wrote: ISTM that the phrase Request queue is not used much around the lock. Using the phrase wait queue or Simon's suggestion sound better to at least me. Thought?

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-02-04 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi, On 04/02/14 12:38, Fujii Masao wrote: ISTM that the phrase Request queue is not used much around the lock. Using the phrase wait queue or Simon's suggestion sound better to at least me. Thought? Sounds reasonable to me. Attached patch changes messages to the following: Process holding

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-02-04 Thread Rajeev rastogi
On 4th February 2014, Christian kruse Wrote: On 04/02/14 12:38, Fujii Masao wrote: ISTM that the phrase Request queue is not used much around the lock. Using the phrase wait queue or Simon's suggestion sound better to at least me. Thought? Sounds reasonable to me. Attached patch

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-02-03 Thread Fujii Masao
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 7:41 PM, Christian Kruse christ...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi, On 01/02/14 02:45, Fujii Masao wrote: LOG: process 33662 still waiting for ShareLock on transaction 1011 after 1000.184 ms DETAIL: Process holding the lock: 33660. Request queue: 33662. [... snip

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-02-03 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi, On 03/02/14 17:59, Fujii Masao wrote: Since you added errdetail_log_plural(), ISTM that you need to update sources.sgml. [x] Fixed. While I'm griping, this message isn't even trying to follow the project's message style guidelines. Detail or context messages are supposed to be

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-02-03 Thread Simon Riggs
On 3 February 2014 10:06, Christian Kruse christ...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi, On 03/02/14 17:59, Fujii Masao wrote: Since you added errdetail_log_plural(), ISTM that you need to update sources.sgml. [x] Fixed. While I'm griping, this message isn't even trying to follow the project's

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-02-03 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi Simon, On 03/02/14 10:43, Simon Riggs wrote: Singular: The following process is holding the lock: A. The request queue consists of: B. Plural: Following processes are holding the lock: A, B. The request queue consists of: C. Seems too complex. How about this... Lock

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-02-03 Thread Fujii Masao
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 8:53 PM, Christian Kruse christ...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: Hi Simon, On 03/02/14 10:43, Simon Riggs wrote: Singular: The following process is holding the lock: A. The request queue consists of: B. Plural: Following processes are holding the lock: A, B. The

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-02-01 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi, On 01/02/14 02:45, Fujii Masao wrote: LOG: process 33662 still waiting for ShareLock on transaction 1011 after 1000.184 ms DETAIL: Process holding the lock: 33660. Request queue: 33662. [… snip …] LOG: process 33665 still waiting for ExclusiveLock on tuple (0,4) of

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-31 Thread Fujii Masao
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Rajeev rastogi rajeev.rast...@huawei.com wrote: On 28/01/14, Christian Kruse wrote: I have checked the revised patch. It looks fine to me except one minor code formatting issue. In elog.c, two tabs are missing in the definition of function

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-28 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi, On 27/01/14 11:44, Rajeev rastogi wrote: I have checked the revised patch. It looks fine to me except one minor code formatting issue. In elog.c, two tabs are missing in the definition of function errdetail_log_plural. Please run pgindent tool to check the same. I did, but this

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-28 Thread Rajeev rastogi
On 28/01/14, Christian Kruse wrote: I have checked the revised patch. It looks fine to me except one minor code formatting issue. In elog.c, two tabs are missing in the definition of function errdetail_log_plural. Please run pgindent tool to check the same. I did, but this reformats

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-27 Thread Rajeev rastogi
On 23/01/14, Christian Kruse wrote: Well, is it context or detail? Those fields have reasonably well defined meanings IMO. I find the distinction somewhat blurry and think both would be appropriate. But since I wasn't sure I changed to detail. If we need errcontext_plural, let's add

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-23 Thread Rajeev rastogi
On 23/01/14 14:45, Christian Kruse wrote: Well, is it context or detail? Those fields have reasonably well defined meanings IMO. I find the distinction somewhat blurry and think both would be appropriate. But since I wasn't sure I changed to detail. If we need errcontext_plural, let's

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-23 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi, I think you have attached wrong patch. Hurm. You are right, attached v3, not v4. Sorry. Best regards, -- Christian Kruse http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training Services diff --git a/src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-22 Thread Simon Riggs
On 22 January 2014 04:42, Rajeev rastogi rajeev.rast...@huawei.com wrote: On 31st December 2013, Christian Kruse Wrote: Hi there, I created two patches improving the log messages generated by log_lock_waits. The first patch shows the process IDs holding a lock we try to acquire

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-22 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi, On 22/01/14 12:40, Simon Riggs wrote: 1. I find a issue in following scenario: session 1 with process id X: BEGIN; LOCK TABLE foo IN SHARE MODE; session 2 with process id Y: BEGIN; LOCK TABLE foo IN EXCLUSIVE MODE; session 3 with process id Z: BEGIN; LOCK

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-22 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Christian Kruse wrote: I think this could use some more comments -- for instance at the top of the while loop, explain what's its purpose. if (deadlock_state == DS_SOFT_DEADLOCK) ereport(LOG,

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-22 Thread Tom Lane
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes: This ngettext() call is repeated four times in the new code, which is a bit annoying because it's not trivial. I think you could assign the ngettext() to a char * at the bottom of the loop, and then in the ereport() calls use it: Would that not

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-22 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi, attached you will find a new version of the patch containing more comments. On 22/01/14 12:00, Tom Lane wrote: Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com writes: This ngettext() call is repeated four times in the new code, which is a bit annoying because it's not trivial. I think you

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-22 Thread Tom Lane
Christian Kruse christ...@2ndquadrant.com writes: However, the real problem here is that you shouldn't be calling ngettext manually in an ereport context in the first place. There is infrastructure in place for that, and this isn't using it. Fixed in attached patch. I changed it from calling

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-22 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi, On 22/01/14 14:45, Tom Lane wrote: Well, is it context or detail? Those fields have reasonably well defined meanings IMO. I find the distinction somewhat blurry and think both would be appropriate. But since I wasn't sure I changed to detail. If we need errcontext_plural, let's add it,

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2014-01-21 Thread Rajeev rastogi
On 31st December 2013, Christian Kruse Wrote: Hi there, I created two patches improving the log messages generated by log_lock_waits. The first patch shows the process IDs holding a lock we try to acquire (show_pids_in_lock_log.patch), sample output (log_lock_waits=on required):

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2013-12-31 Thread Simon Riggs
On 30 December 2013 19:52, Christian Kruse christ...@2ndquadrant.com wrote: I created two patches.. Patches are related but separate, so should be tracked on separate threads. Please add them to the CF app also. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL

Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

2013-12-31 Thread Christian Kruse
Hi, On 31/12/13 08:48, Simon Riggs wrote: I created two patches.. Patches are related but separate, so should be tracked on separate threads. [x] Done (in 20131231091244.gb25...@defunct.ch) Please add them to the CF app also. [x] Done. I modified the existing commitfest entry