Re: [HACKERS] 'Waiting on lock' - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] 'Waiting on lock'
Date
Msg-id 18686.1182354448@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] 'Waiting on lock'  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] 'Waiting on lock'  (Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-patches
Gregory Stark <stark@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> Is it possible for unlocking the semaphore to wake another process other than
> our own? In which case checking log_lock_waits before signalling the semaphore
> arguably locks us into having log_lock_waits be PGC_POSTMASTER.

How you figure that?

> Currently it's PGC_SIGHUP which is odd since it could have been
> USERSET in the old regime.

Actually I changed it to SUSET yesterday.  I don't see any strong reason
why we should disallow different processes having different settings;
however, if the DBA is trying to gather this info, random users
shouldn't be able to turn it off.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: Preliminary GSSAPI Patches
Next
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 'Waiting on lock'