Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recentlyadded wait events - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recentlyadded wait events
Date
Msg-id 20170809192556.koklj3dremkc5bfb@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recently added wait events  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recentlyadded wait events  (Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:

> I think generating whatever we can from a single authoritative file
> is indeed a good idea.

Yay.

> But I had the impression that people also wanted to enforce a rule
> about "only one use of each wait event name", which'd require a
> checker script, no?  (I'm not really convinced that we need such a
> rule, fwiw.)

I'm not convinced of that, either.  Of the possible problems in the
area, that seems the lesser one.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dean Rasheed
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] dubious error message from partition.c
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] why not parallel seq scan for slow functions