pg.ddx.io pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feed From: Masahiro Ikeda <ikedamsh@oss.nttdata.com>
To: Drouvot, Bertrand <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Introduce WAIT_EVENT_EXTENSION and WAIT_EVENT_BUFFER_PIN
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2023 10:57:55 +0900
Message-ID: <4420c7fb5bf0894ce92d6857a8d041ed@oss.nttdata.com> (raw )
In-Reply-To: <81290a48-b25c-22a5-31a6-3feff5864fe3@gmail.com >
References: <c6f35117-4b20-4c78-1df5-d3056010dcf5@gmail.com >
<20230515182956.5lavflljhpgpokxc@awork3.anarazel.de >
<ZGKynuIpQp1G8Bec@paquier.xyz >
<20230516001716.iy7no2q77vwdt5w2@awork3.anarazel.de >
<ZGLQnikZoxsqj2dl@paquier.xyz >
<20230516010102.jwmsuaoynz6zfqmn@awork3.anarazel.de >
<ZGMRMrrz02v8MGTE@paquier.xyz >
<CA+TgmobtMj42OoAqETwhmiNU3k9LB+MiZhK+qdKg4Jh3Dq-Dag@mail.gmail.com >
<20230517233832.si5zpq3qnxmx3swb@awork3.anarazel.de >
<CA+TgmoaYTd3YN3N3vtXi+X63ePOzAdiKfVYX-BROtpWSdF-Auw@mail.gmail.com >
<ZGaocGfirEt6OXNP@paquier.xyz >
<81290a48-b25c-22a5-31a6-3feff5864fe3@gmail.com >
Hi,
On 2023-05-19 16:48, Drouvot, Bertrand wrote:
> While at it, I think that making use of an enum might also be an open
> door
> (need to think more about it) to allow extensions to set their own wait
> event.
> Something like RequestNamedLWLockTranche()/GetNamedLWLockTranche() are
> doing.
>
> Currently we have "only" the "extension" wait event which is not that
> useful when
> there is multiples extensions installed in a database.
(Excuse me for cutting in, and this is not directly related to the
thread.)
+1. I'm interested in the feature.
Recently, I encountered a case where it would be nice if
different wait events were output for each extension.
I tested a combination of two extensions, postgres_fdw and neon[1],
and they output the "Extension" wait event, but it wasn't immediately
clear
which one was the bottleneck.
This is just a example and it probable be useful for other users. IMO,
at least,
it's better to improve the specification that "Extension" wait event
type has
only the "Extension" wait event.
[1] https://github.com/neondatabase/neon
Regards,
--
Masahiro Ikeda
NTT DATA CORPORATION
view thread (25+ messages) latest in thread
Message-ID: <4420c7fb5bf0894ce92d6857a8d041ed@oss.nttdata.com>
Permalink: ../4420c7fb5bf0894ce92d6857a8d041ed@oss.nttdata.com/
Also on: postgresql.org/message-id/4420c7fb5bf0894ce92d6857a8d041ed@oss.nttdata.com
copy link · copy postgr.es
reply Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: ikedamsh@oss.nttdata.com, bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com, michael@paquier.xyz, robertmhaas@gmail.com, andres@anarazel.de, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Introduce WAIT_EVENT_EXTENSION and WAIT_EVENT_BUFFER_PIN
In-Reply-To: <4420c7fb5bf0894ce92d6857a8d041ed@oss.nttdata.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox