Re: Notice lock waits - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Haribabu Kommi
Subject Re: Notice lock waits
Date
Msg-id CAJrrPGfknt=p5neGKM_hcQejKT8Gc_2rdT5KUtGWBq5Bibu43Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Notice lock waits  (Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Notice lock waits
List pgsql-hackers


On Sat, Aug 6, 2016 at 3:00 AM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote:
One time too many, I ran some minor change using psql on a production
server and was wondering why it was taking so much longer than it did
on the test server.  Only to discover, after messing around with
opening new windows and running queries against pg_stat_activity and
pg_locks and so on, that it was waiting for a lock.

So I created a new guc, notice_lock_waits, which acts like
log_lock_waits but sends the message as NOTICE so it will show up on
interactive connections like psql.

I turn it on in my .psqlrc, as it doesn't make much sense for me to
turn it on in non-interactive sessions.

A general facility for promoting selected LOG messages to NOTICE would
be nice, but I don't know how to design or implement that.  This is
much easier, and I find it quite useful.

I have it PGC_SUSET because it does send some tiny amount of
information about the blocking process (the PID) to the blocked
process.  That is probably too paranoid, because the PID can be seen
by anyone in the pg_locks table anyway.

Do you think this is useful and generally implemented in the correct
way?  If so, I'll try to write some sgml documentation for it.


Providing the details of lock wait to the client is good. I fell this message
is useful for the cases where User/administrator is trying to perform some
SQL operations.

I also feel that, adding a GUC variable for these logs to show it to user
may not be good. Changing the existing GUC may be better.

I am not sure whether it really beneficial in providing all LOG as NOTICE
messages with a generic framework, it may be unnecessary overhead
for some users, I am not 100% sure.

Regards,
Hari Babu
Fujitsu Australia

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Rushabh Lathia
Date:
Subject: Re: Showing parallel status in \df+
Next
From: Craig Ringer
Date:
Subject: Re: Handling dropped attributes in pglogical_proto