Re: [PATCH] Identify LWLocks in tracepoints

Craig Ringer <craig.ringer@enterprisedb.com>

From: Craig Ringer <craig.ringer@enterprisedb.com>
To: david@pgmasters.net
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Date: 2021-03-10T05:38:06Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On Wed, 3 Mar 2021 at 20:50, David Steele <david@pgmasters.net> wrote:

> On 1/22/21 6:02 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> This patch set no longer applies:
> http://cfbot.cputube.org/patch_32_2927.log.
>
> Can we get a rebase? Also marked Waiting on Author.
>

Rebased as requested.

I'm still interested in whether Andres will be able to do anything about
identifying LWLocks in a cross-backend manner. But this work doesn't really
depend on that; it'd benefit from it, but would be easily adapted to it
later if needed.

Commits

  1. Emit dummy statements for probes.d probes when disabled

  2. Prevent lwlock dtrace probes from unnecessary work

  3. doc: Fix typo in logicaldecoding.sgml.

  4. Move lwlock-release probe back where it belongs

  5. Remove bogus tracepoint

  6. Simplify LWLock tranche machinery by removing array_base/array_stride.

  7. Improve LWLock scalability.