Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!)
От | Jeff Davis |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1284311599.19335.11.camel@jdavis-laptop обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07:
Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!)
Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 12:29 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > ... why throw an ERROR there if it can't happen (or > > indicates an inconsistent state when it does happen)? > > Are you suggesting that an Assert would be sufficient? > I'm not too picky about whether it's Assert, ERROR, or PANIC (Asserts aren't available in production systems, which I assume is why elog was used); but we should be consistent and document that:(a) it shouldn't happen(b) that it's just a sanity check and we're ignoringthe race However, that also means that the whole concept of OwnLatch/DisownLatch is entirely redundant, and only there for asserts because it doesn't do anything else. That seems a little strange to me, as well, so (at minimum) it should be documented that the functions really have no effect on execution and are required only to support debugging. Regards,Jeff Davis
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: