On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 6:42 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2023 at 12:16 PM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > It seems to be confusing and the user won't get the result even if
> > they search it by transactionid = 741. So I've attached the patch to
> > fix it. With the patch, the pg_locks views shows like:
> >
> > locktype | database | relation | page | tuple | virtualxid |
> > transactionid | classid | objid | objsubid | virtualtransaction | pid
> > | mode | granted | fastpath | waitstart
> >
-----------+----------+----------+------+-------+------------+---------------+---------+-------+----------+--------------------+--------+---------------+---------+----------+-----------
> > spectoken | | | | | |
> > 746 | | 1 | | 3/4 | 535618 |
> > ExclusiveLock | t | f |
> > (1 row)
> >
>
> Is it a good idea to display spec token as objid, if so, how will
> users know? Currently for Advisory locks, we display values in
> classid, objid, objsubid different than the original meaning of fields
> but those are explained in docs [1]. Wouldn't it be better to mention
> this in docs?
Agreed. Attached the updated patch.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com