On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure what the resolution of Alvaro's concern was, so I left the
> flag reporting the same as the previous patch.
Alvaro's concern was that the new flags added (those added by the
foreign key locks patch) do something cute with re-using multiple
other bits in an otherwise nonsensical combination to represent a
distinct state. So as written, the infoMask if statements will result
in spurious reporting of information stored in t_infomask. If you AND
some integer with HEAP_XMAX_SHR_LOCK and get something non-zero,
you'll surely also get a non-zero result with HEAP_LOCK_MASK, because
the latter flag has all the same bits set as the former (plus others,
obviously).
--
Peter Geoghegan