Re: Introduce WAIT_EVENT_EXTENSION and WAIT_EVENT_BUFFER_PIN
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, "Drouvot, Bertrand" <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2023-05-17T22:48:26Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 09:22:19AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > It seems to me that your automatic generation code might need a > special case for wait event types that contain only a single wait > event. But that doesn't seem like a bad thing to have. Adding > pgstat_get_wait_extension adds runtime cost for no corresponding > benefit. Having a special case in the code to avoid that seems > worthwhile. Okay. We are going to need an approach similar to what's done for src/backend/nodes where two things are generated in order to be able to have some of the wait event classes be treated as exceptions in the switch calling each function (pgstat_get_wait_event). I'd assume: - Create the code calling the functions automatically, say in a wait_event_type.switch.c or something like that. If a class has one single element, generate the code from it. - Create a second file with the functions and their internals, as the patch does now (like wait_event_type.funcs.c?), discarding classes with single elements. - Skip the creation of the enum structures for single-element classes, as well. Still it looks like the renaming of BufferPin would need to remain around to ease a bit the work of the script. Bertrand, what do you think? -- Michael
Commits
-
Refactor some code related to wait events "BufferPin" and "Extension"
- 2aeaf80e578e 17.0 landed