On 2016-03-18 11:01:04 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 9:22 PM, Michael Paquier > <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > FWIW, my instinctive thought on the matter is to report the event > > directly in WaitLatch() via a name of the event caller provided > > directly in it. The category of the event is then defined > > automatically as we would know its origin. The code path defining the > > origin point from where a event type comes from is the critical thing > > I think to define an event category. The LWLock events are doing that > > in lwlock.c. > > I'm very skeptical of grouping everything that waits using latches as > a latch wait, but maybe it's OK to do it that way. I was thinking > more of adding categories like "client wait" with events like "client > read" and "client write".
+1. I think categorizing latch waits together will be pretty much meaningless. We use the same latch for a lot of different things, and the context in which we're waiting is the important bit. Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
