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

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recently added wait events
Date
Msg-id 9676.1502300133@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recentlyadded wait events  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recentlyadded wait events  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> This thread is surprising.  If we generate the few lines of code being
> in trouble, we don't need any checker script, so I don't see why we'd go
> the route of the checker script instead.

I think generating whatever we can from a single authoritative file
is indeed a good idea.  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.)
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recentlyadded wait events
Next
From: Dean Rasheed
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] dubious error message from partition.c