Re: SSI bug?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dan Ports
Тема Re: SSI bug?
Дата
Msg-id 20110403061644.GS81592@csail.mit.edu
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: SSI bug?  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Ответы Re: SSI bug?  (yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi))
Re: SSI bug?  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
I think I see what is going on now. We are sometimes failing to set the
commitSeqNo correctly on the lock. In particular, if a lock assigned to
OldCommittedSxact is marked with InvalidSerCommitNo, it will never be
cleared.

The attached patch corrects this:
 TransferPredicateLocksToNewTarget should initialize a new lock
 entry's commitSeqNo to that of the old one being transferred, or take
 the minimum commitSeqNo if it is merging two lock entries.

 Also, CreatePredicateLock should initialize commitSeqNo for to
 InvalidSerCommitSeqNo instead of to 0. (I don't think using 0 would
 actually affect anything, but we should be consistent.)

 I also added a couple of assertions I used to track this down: a
 lock's commitSeqNo should never be zero, and it should be
 InvalidSerCommitSeqNo if and only if the lock is not held by
 OldCommittedSxact.

Takashi, does this patch fix your problem with leaked SIReadLocks?

Dan


--
Dan R. K. Ports              MIT CSAIL                http://drkp.net/

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Shigeru Hanada
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Support comments on FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER and SERVER objects.
Следующее
От: Dave Page
Дата:
Сообщение: FDW state from plan time