| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Daniel F <dbf13db(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Weird behavior with "sensitive" cursors. |
| Date: | 2009-10-01 23:04:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20091001230401.GM5607@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Tom Lane escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom Lane escribi:
> >> I don't think that testing rowMarks is the right thing at all here.
> >> That tells you whether it's a SELECT FOR UPDATE, but actually we
> >> want any cursor (and only cursors) to have a private snapshot.
>
> > The attached patch implements this. I intend to apply to 8.4 and HEAD
> > shortly.
>
> Looks sane. Can we add a short regression test sequence that checks
> for this?
Something is wrong with the patch :-( I'm getting
WARNING: Snapshot reference leak: Snapshot 0x1be5840 still referenced
with a simple test case. Still investigating.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tim Landscheidt | 2009-10-01 23:35:25 | Procedure for feature requests? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-10-01 21:02:52 | Re: Vacuumdb Fails: Huge Tuple |