MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2023 16:49:14 +0900
From: Masahiro Ikeda <ikedamsh@oss.nttdata.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Bharath Rupireddy <bharath.rupireddyforpostgres@gmail.com>, Tristan
 Partin <tristan@neon.tech>, andres@anarazel.de,
 pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Support to define custom wait events for extensions
In-Reply-To: <ZMdikEm4Xq9KQKNY@paquier.xyz>
References: <ZK9iLbi2l2rrELfV@paquier.xyz>
 <97449ae1a3b2189934890f6d78b18216@oss.nttdata.com>
 <ca567bd4076dfc7e8b0d39afe5b0cc22@oss.nttdata.com>
 <CU69THFPG2CN.MK16RYW510YD@gonk> <ZMI1/tQp/TQ1/m3B@paquier.xyz>
 <cd09c86daa9e4c1c5f7903da39b75994@oss.nttdata.com>
 <ZMMUiR7kvzPWenhF@paquier.xyz>
 <CALj2ACVq=BogP=iQ0C=Pjzk4+rSTaKZU_+fdMRk4YyG8B60gAQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZMcJ7F7nkGkIs8zP@paquier.xyz>
 <446d286f3272437df705ee69ad0d8793@oss.nttdata.com>
 <ZMdikEm4Xq9KQKNY@paquier.xyz>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.11
Message-ID: <dbd9bc09299ff72b940d674d44c45a41@oss.nttdata.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/dbd9bc09299ff72b940d674d44c45a41%40oss.nttdata.com>
Precedence: bulk

On 2023-07-31 16:28, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 03:53:27PM +0900, Masahiro Ikeda wrote:
>> 	/* This should only be called for user-defined wait event. */
>> 	if (eventId < NUM_BUILTIN_WAIT_EVENT_EXTENSION)
>> 		ereport(ERROR,
>> 				errcode(ERRCODE_INVALID_PARAMETER_VALUE),
>> 				errmsg("invalid wait event ID %u", eventId));
>> 
>> I was just wondering if it should also check the eventId
>> that has been allocated though it needs to take the spinlock
>> and GetWaitEventExtensionIdentifier() doesn't take it into account.
> 
> What kind of extra check do you have in mind?  Once WAIT_EVENT_ID_MASK
> is applied, we already know that we don't have something larger than
> PG_UNIT16_MAX, or perhaps you want to cross-check this number with
> what nextId holds in shared memory and that we don't have a number
> between nextId and PG_UNIT16_MAX?  I am not sure that we need to care
> much about that this much in this code path, and I'd rather avoid
> taking an extra time the spinlock just for a cross-check.

OK. I assumed to check that we don't have a number between nextId and
PG_UNIT16_MAX.

Regards,
-- 
Masahiro Ikeda
NTT DATA CORPORATION