Re: Rethink the wait event names for postgres_fdw, dblink and etc
| От | Michael Paquier |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Rethink the wait event names for postgres_fdw, dblink and etc |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | ZR4RPXBA5AvrEfGu@paquier.xyz обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Rethink the wait event names for postgres_fdw, dblink and etc (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Rethink the wait event names for postgres_fdw, dblink and etc
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 05:19:40PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > I am lacking a bit of time now, but I have applied the bits for > test_shm_mq and worker_spi. Note that I have not added tests for > test_shm_mq as it may be possible that the two events (for the > bgworker startup and for a message to be queued) are never reached > depending on the timing. I'll handle the rest tomorrow, with likely > some adjustments to the tests. (I may as well just remove them, this > API is already covered by worker_spi.) After sleeping on it, I've taken the decision to remove the tests. As far as I have tested, this was stable, but this does not really improve the test coverage as WaitEventExtensionNew() is covered in worker_spi. I have done tweaks to the docs and the variable names, and applied that into its own commit. Note as well that the docs of dblink were wrong for DblinkGetConnect: the wait event could be seen in other functions than dblink() and dblink_exec(). -- Michael
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: