Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2025 14:12:30 -0500
From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Improve LWLock tranche name visibility across backends
Message-ID: <aJEGHoizgvATf5wP@nathan>
References: <aHaIe44bAENt8JPW@nathan>
 <CAA5RZ0v2JdAFh9yBsgvqNXrF68SKoF+bbjhn7ZBW_Oo66XUhrQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <aHaL5uFCaj_cfueU@nathan>
 <CAA5RZ0tL71TMhtraUHcz+d23v2i5vKgfxpNKv5DhpM6A-mkvOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <aIvfFqqIPJjagSgD@nathan>
 <aIy885hlAK9BD/2F@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <CAA5RZ0v5eLMHu+C0xRQmN==fXi3b8rsL66X0ScuqgDdSs4+m5w@mail.gmail.com>
 <aJBnu+G5epyScTyL@ip-10-97-1-34.eu-west-3.compute.internal>
 <CAA5RZ0t3ZwvMNWGNFx6yobUNZNca4Rz2kLhAP8bb8chXYyXJog@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAA5RZ0s0E52W_k53njwHCQN6tXE_FkOH705brXRo7D2hYcQ46Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAA5RZ0s0E52W_k53njwHCQN6tXE_FkOH705brXRo7D2hYcQ46Q@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/aJEGHoizgvATf5wP%40nathan>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 04, 2025 at 11:32:19AM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote:
> With a local hash table, I don't think it's necessary to introduce new
> code for managing
> a DSA based list of tranche names as is done in v3. We can go back to
> storing the shared
> trance names in dshash.
> 
> What do you think?

My first thought is that a per-backend hash table seems too
expensive/complicated for this.  Couldn't it just be an array like we have
now?

-- 
nathan