Feedback-ID: i0fe9450f:Fastmail
Date: Sat, 30 May 2026 13:13:47 +0900
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>,
	Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
	Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>
Subject: Re: injection_points: Switch wait/wakeup to use atomics rather than
 latches
Message-ID: <ahpj-2ng4YN3cA0W@paquier.xyz>
References: <aher0VsjJ8xeNgLq@paquier.xyz>
 <CA+TgmoamSXmT7uMXBw6c3YJgSSz6dYdpMsJf47jwaPH9kVbmyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ahjNjsg_Ls7LwASJ@paquier.xyz>
 <CA+TgmoYE-9WhM-owWtX3grbSeHtOJCF__wEEdoD-jj-oJ+=TSg@mail.gmail.com>
 <b34ff5d0-eefe-4f51-91c4-59e5c2aef25e@iki.fi>
 <CA+TgmoagPYFVPJXibNthGQEPTrpvxM5hW-aph9ejaMOU=GGRLw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="PkR1Q9wa54lcaATQ"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+TgmoagPYFVPJXibNthGQEPTrpvxM5hW-aph9ejaMOU=GGRLw@mail.gmail.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ahpj-2ng4YN3cA0W%40paquier.xyz>
Precedence: bulk


--PkR1Q9wa54lcaATQ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, May 29, 2026 at 12:00:46PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2026 at 9:31=E2=80=AFAM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.=
fi> wrote:
>> They only work after you have a PGPROC slot. If you want to inject code
>> to authentication, or into postmaster, you cannot use them.
>=20
> OK, got it now.

It seems like Heikki's comment was better worded than mine.

Also mentioned upthread, but the lack of PGPROC also means a lack of
monitoring as wait events cannot be tracked.  Currently, we rely on
that in the TAP tests.  For cases where the procs are not available, I
don't have a better idea than generating a LOG entry after the wait
counts have been generated (with a PID) and couple that with a poll of
the server logs to let a script understand that a process is in
waiting mode.

As a whole, I don't think that we should try to be fancy with the
implementation, which is why I have used primitives that should work
in any context, and I'm not convinced that this is worth its own
facility if that just means more responsiveness (in most cases the
wait should not take more than a couple ms to notice a wakeup).  I'm
open to more fancy ideas, of course.
--
Michael

--PkR1Q9wa54lcaATQ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=W3qd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--PkR1Q9wa54lcaATQ--