Re: SSI bug?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Kevin Grittner
Тема Re: SSI bug?
Дата
Msg-id 4D943BEC020000250003BFDA@gw.wicourts.gov
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: SSI bug?  (yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi))
Ответы Re: SSI bug?  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
Re: SSI bug?  (Dan Ports <drkp@csail.mit.edu>)
Список pgsql-hackers
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp> wrote:

> hoge=# select locktype,count(*) from pg_locks group by locktype;
> -[ RECORD 1 ]--------
> locktype | virtualxid
> count    | 1
> -[ RECORD 2 ]--------
> locktype | relation
> count    | 1
> -[ RECORD 3 ]--------
> locktype | tuple
> count    | 7061

I've stared at the code for hours and have only come up with one
race condition which can cause this, although the window is so small
it's hard to believe that you would get this volume of orphaned
locks.  I'll keep looking, but if you could try this to see if it
has a material impact, that would be great.

I am very sure this patch is needed and that it is safe.  It moves a
LWLockAcquire statement up to cover the setup for the loop that it
already covers.  It also includes a fix to a comment that got missed
when we switched from the pointer between lock targets to
duplicating the locks.

-Kevin


Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bernd Helmle
Дата:
Сообщение: wal_buffers = -1 and SIGHUP
Следующее
От: rsmogura
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: 2nd Level Buffer Cache