Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > I don't see NUM_USER_DEFINED_LWLOCKS defined in 8.0 or 8.1, so what
> > system do you propose to allow you to set this value?
>
> I'd be willing to add the proposed patch in 8.1 (style note:
> NUM_USER_DEFINED_LWLOCKS should be set in pg_config_manual.h not
> lwlock.h). However, it's certainly not going to magically appear in
> existing releases, so I dunno if that'd make Marc happy or not.

Shouldn't it be something we can put in postgresql.conf?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend

Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'd be willing to add the proposed patch in 8.1 (style note:
>> NUM_USER_DEFINED_LWLOCKS should be set in pg_config_manual.h not
>> lwlock.h).

> Shouldn't it be something we can put in postgresql.conf?

No more than any of the other entries in pg_config_manual.h.
With only one known request for a user-allocated lock, it's hard to
justify the overhead of a GUC variable.

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly