On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 6:03 PM Hüseyin Demir <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Fujii, > > Thanks for the patch. The rate-limiting approach makes sense to me. A couple > of thoughts: > > 1) I think Chao Li's suggestion of using max(10s, deadlock_timeout) as the > rate limit interval is worth adopting. If someone has set deadlock_timeout > to, say, 30s or 60s, they've already signaled they don't need frequent > lock-wait feedback. Logging every 10s after a 60s deadlock_timeout feels > inconsistent with that intent.
Or perhaps they expect the log message to be emitted only once, just after deadlock_timeout, similar to the current behavior when client_connection_check_interval is not set, I guess. I'm now starting thinking it might be better to preserve the existing behavior (emitting the message once per wait) regardless of whether client_connection_check_interval is set, and implement that first. If there is a need to emit the message periodically, we could add that as a separate feature later so that it works independently of the client_connection_check_interval setting. Thought? Regards, -- Fujii Masao
