Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> writes:
> I noticed that requests for more LWLocks follow a similar pattern as
> regular shared memory requests, and I figured that we would want to do
> something similar for those, but I wasn't sure exactly how to proceed. I
> saw two options: 1) use shmem_request_hook for both regular requests and
> LWLock requests or 2) introduce an lwlock_request_hook. My instinct was
> that option 1 was preferable,
Yeah, I agree, which says that maybe the hook name needs to be something
else (not that I have a good proposal).
> but AFAICT this requires introducing a new
> external variable for inspecting whether the request is made at a valid
> time.
Uh, why? It'd be the core code's responsibility to place the hook
call at a point where you could do both.
regards, tom lane
