On 2025/03/11 16:50, Yuki Seino wrote:
>>
>> Instead, wouldn't it be simpler to update LockAcquireExtended() to
>> take a new argument, like logLockFailure, to control whether
>> a lock failure should be logged directly? I’ve adjusted the patch
>> accordingly and attached it. Please let me know what you think!
>>
>> Regards,
> Thank you!
>
> It's very simple and nice.
> It seems like it can also handle other lock failure cases by extending logLockFailure.
> > I agree with this propose.
Thanks for reviewing the patch!
I've made some minor cosmetic adjustments. The updated patch is attached.
Unless there are any objections, I'll proceed with committing it.
Regards,
--
Fujii Masao
Advanced Computing Technology Center
Research and Development Headquarters
NTT DATA CORPORATION