Re: Improve LWLock tranche name visibility across backends

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>, Sami Imseih <samimseih@gmail.com>, Rahila Syed <rahilasyed90@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-08-19T18:31:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 19, 2025 at 02:06:50PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> Possibly stupid question - is it really worth having a dynamic structure here?
> The number of tranches is strictly bound, it seems like it'd be simpler to
> have an array of tranch nmes in shared memory.

Tranches can be allocated post-startup with LWLockNewTrancheId() (e.g.,
autoprewarm).

-- 
nathan



Commits

  1. test_dsa: Avoid leaking LWLock tranches.

  2. Teach DSM registry to ERROR if attaching to an uninitialized entry.

  3. Add a test harness for the LWLock tranche code.

  4. Revert recent change to RequestNamedLWLockTranche().

  5. Move dynamically-allocated LWLock tranche names to shared memory.

  6. Prepare DSM registry for upcoming changes to LWLock tranche names.

  7. Add GetNamedDSA() and GetNamedDSHash().