Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Keep one postmaster monitoring pipe per process

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Thomas Munro
Тема Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Keep one postmaster monitoring pipe per process
Дата
Msg-id CAEepm=0=PkSXQ5oNU8BhY1DEzxw_EspsU14D_zAPnj+fBAjxFQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Keep one postmaster monitoring pipe per process  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] PATCH: Keep one postmaster monitoring pipe perprocess  (Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 11:51 PM Thomas Munro
<thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 10:30 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
> > Yeah. That seems good. Couldn't we reuse prepared WaitEventSet in
> > other places? For example PgstatCollectorMain has the same
> > characteristics, where WaitLatchOrSocket is used with fixed
> > parameters and waiting on a socket which gets frequent receipts.
>
> +1, but I'm considering that to be a separate project, or I'll never
> get this patch committed.  It may be possible to have a small number
> of them reused in many places, and it may be possible for
> WaitLatchXXX() to reuse them automatically (so we don't have to change
>  every call site).
>
> > # Is it intentional that the patch doesn't touch pgstat.c?
>
> Yes.  pgstat.c still uses WL_POSTMASTER_DEATH because it does
> something special: it calls pgstat_write_statsfiles() before it exits.

Rebased.

-- 
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Thomas Munro
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Undo logs
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [PATCH] Fix docs to JOHAB encoding on server side