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

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix inadequacies in recentlyadded wait events
Date
Msg-id CAB7nPqT+mq6YaTRuS1o4qHS9KG8z0cBxawqS=MfS9ebwhwmjRg@mail.gmail.com
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
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 9:25 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I think generating whatever we can from a single authoritative file
>> is indeed a good idea.
>
> Yay.

Indeed.

>> 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.

With a minimal maintenance effort we can be careful enough. I think
that a comment for example in pgstat.c about the usage uniqueness
would be an adapted answer.
-- 
Michael



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Cache lookup errors with functions manipulation object addresses
Next
From: Ashutosh Bapat
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Log LDAP "diagnostic messages"?