Re: Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire

From: Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com>
To: Christian Kruse <christian(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Patch: Show process IDs of processes holding a lock; show relation and tuple infos of a lock to acquire
Date: 2014-01-28 09:39:17
Message-ID: BF2827DCCE55594C8D7A8F7FFD3AB7713DDBD252@SZXEML508-MBX.china.huawei.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 28/01/14, Christian Kruse wrote:
> > I have checked the revised patch. It looks fine to me except one
> minor code formatting issue.
> > In elog.c, two tabs are missing in the definition of function
> "errdetail_log_plural".
> > Please run pgindent tool to check the same.
>
> I did, but this reformats various other locations in the file, too.
> Nevertheless I now ran pg_indent against it and removed the other parts.
> Attached you will find the corrected patch version.
>
> > Also I would like to highlight one behavior here is that process ID
> of
> > process trying to acquire lock is also listed in the list of "Request
> queue". E.g.
> >
> > session 1 with process id X: BEGIN; LOCK TABLE foo IN SHARE
> MODE;
> > session 2 with process id Y: BEGIN; LOCK TABLE foo IN EXCLUSIVE
> > MODE;
> >
> > On execution of LOCK in session-2, as part of log it will display as:
> > DETAIL: Process holding the lock: X. Request queue: Y.
> >
> > Where Y is the process ID of same process, which was trying to
> acquire lock.
>
> This is on purpose due to the rewording of the Message. In the first
> version the PID of the backend was missing.
>
> Thanks for the review!
>

Now patch looks fine to me. I am marking this as "Ready for Committer".

Thanks and Regards,
Kumar Rajeev Rastogi

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rajeev rastogi 2014-01-28 09:42:37 Function definition removed but prototype still there
Previous Message Rajeev rastogi 2014-01-28 09:13:15 Observed Compilation warning in WIN32 build