On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 04:07:12PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 1:48 PM Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
>> Thanks for that. Attached is just a rebased version with a commit
>> message added. If there aren't any other concerns, I'll commit this in
>> the next few days and back-patch it. When it comes to 12 and older,
>> does anyone want to opine about the wait event to use? I was thinking
>> PG_WAIT_TIMEOUT or WAIT_EVENT_PG_SLEEP ...
>
> I'm not sure if we should back-patch this, but I think if you do you
> should just add a wait event, rather than using a generic one.
I would not back-patch that either, as this is an improvement of the
current state. I agree that this had better introduce a new wait
event. Even if this stuff gets backpatched, you won't introduce an
ABI incompatibility with a new event as long as you add the new event
at the end of the existing enum lists, but let's keep the wait events
ordered on HEAD.
--
Michael
