Re: client_connection_check_interval default value

Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
To: Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Jeremy Schneider <schneider@ardentperf.com>, Jacob Champion <jacob.champion@enterprisedb.com>, "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Marat Buharov <marat.buharov@gmail.com>, Greg Sabino Mullane <htamfids@gmail.com>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Date: 2026-02-18T08:03:48Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2026-02-18 at 14:30 +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 9:01 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > > The issue is that backends blocked in ProcSleep() are woken up every
> > > client_connection_check_interval and may emit a "still waiting" message
> > > each time if log_lock_waits is enabled. To mitigate this, just one idea is
> > > to add a flag to track whether the "still waiting" message has already been
> > > emitted during a call to ProcSleep(), and suppress further messages
> > > once it has been logged.
> > 
> > Independently of what's the default, it seems like it'd be valuable to
> > make that interaction better.  I think it is reasonable to keep on
> > emitting "still waiting" every so often, but we could probably
> > rate-limit that to a lot less than every 2 seconds.
> 
> Attached is a patch that rate-limits the "still waiting on lock" message
> to at most once every 10s.
> 
> I chose 10s instead of the suggested 2s, since 2s felt too short. But we can
> discuss the appropriate interval and adjust it if needed. The value is
> currently hard-coded, as making it configurable does not seem necessary.

I think that 10 seconds is good.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe



Commits

  1. Add TAP tests for log_lock_waits

  2. Add tests for lock statistics, take two

  3. Ensure "still waiting on lock" message is logged only once per wait.