Re: Introduce WAIT_EVENT_EXTENSION and WAIT_EVENT_BUFFER_PIN - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kirk Wolak
Subject Re: Introduce WAIT_EVENT_EXTENSION and WAIT_EVENT_BUFFER_PIN
Date
Msg-id CACLU5mRWoN5dSPxaT4BSs_xh-Vvd593QKZNuCOfzRfU4DHNuGQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Introduce WAIT_EVENT_EXTENSION and WAIT_EVENT_BUFFER_PIN  (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 1:14 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 06:01:02PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> Why those tweaks are necessary is precisely what I am asking for.

Then the perl script generates the same structures for all the wait
event classes, with all the events associated to that.  There may be a
point in keeping extension and buffer pin out of this refactoring, but
reworking these like that moves in a single place all the wait event
definitions, making future additions easier.  Buffer pin actually
needed a small rename to stick with the naming rules of the other
classes.
+1 (Nice explanation, Improving things, Consistency. Always good) 

These are the two things refactored in the patch, explaining the what.
The reason behind the why is to make the script in charge of
generating all these structures and functions consistent for all the
wait event classes, simply.  Treating all the wait event classes
together eases greatly the generation of the documentation, so that it
is possible to enforce an ordering of the tables of each class used to
list each wait event type attached to them.  Does this explanation
make sense?
+1 (To me, but I am not important. But having this saved in the thread!!!) 

Lock and LWLock are funkier because of the way they grab wait events
for the inner function, still these had better have their
documentation generated so as all the SGML tables created for all the
wait event tables are ordered alphabetically, in the same way as
HEAD.
--
Michael
+1 (Whatever helps automate/generate the docs)

Kirk... 

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Conflict between regression tests namespace & transactions due to recent changes
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: benchmark results comparing versions 15.2 and 16