Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Ildus Kurbangaliev
Subject Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches
Date
Msg-id 9402C5F7-C976-4915-A92C-9234866F2DAF@postgrespro.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers

On Sep 13, 2015, at 11:32 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Ildus Kurbangaliev
<i.kurbangaliev@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
Added changes related to the latest master (for individual LWLocks
definitions)

If I haven't said this clearly enough already, I'm not OK with
changing the tranche name from char * to a fixed-size character array.
Nor am I OK with limiting the maximum number of tranches to 64.  I
worked hard to set this system up so that it did not have limits on
the number of tranches or the lengths of their names, and I don't see
any good reason to add those limitations now.

Yes, that is because I tried to go with current convention working with
shmem in Postgres (there are one function that returns the size and 
others that initialize that memory). But I like your suggestion about
API functions, in that case number of tranches and locks will be known
during the initialization.

----
Ildus Kurbangaliev
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Refactoring of LWLock tranches
Next
From: Tomas Vondra
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: index-only scans with partial indexes