Horton

Re: [PATCH] lock_timeout and common SIGALRM framework

Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>

View thread
From: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
Cc: Marc Cousin <cousinmarc@gmail.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Hans-Juergen Schoenig <hs@cybertec.at>, Ants Aasma <ants@cybertec.at>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: 2012-06-27T08:34:47Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Fix Windows implementation of PGSemaphoreLock.

Attachments

2012-06-26 18:49 keltezéssel, Alvaro Herrera írta:
> Excerpts from Boszormenyi Zoltan's message of mar jun 26 12:43:34 -0400 2012:
>
>> So, should I keep the enum TimeoutName? Are global variables for
>> keeping dynamically assigned values preferred over the enum?
>> Currently we have 5 timeout sources in total, 3 of them are used by
>> regular backends, the remaining 2 are used by replication standby.
>> We can have a fixed size array (say with 8 or 16 elements) for future use
>> and this would be plenty.
>>
>> Opinions?
> My opinion is that the fixed size array is fine.

Attached is the version which uses a registration interface.

Also, to further minimize knowledge of timeouts in timeout.c,
all GUCs are moved back to proc.c

> I'll go set the patch "waiting on author".  Also, remember to review
> some other people's patches.

I will look into it.

Best regards,
Zoltán Böszörményi

-- 
----------------------------------
Zoltán Böszörményi
Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH
Gröhrmühlgasse 26
A-2700 Wiener Neustadt, Austria
Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de
      http://www.postgresql.at/