Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Buffer access rules, and a probable bug

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Buffer access rules, and a probable bug
Date: 2001-07-04 03:29:36
Message-ID: 26901.994217376@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
ncm(at)zembu(dot)com (Nathan Myers) writes:
> Here, backend B is a good citizen and locks while it makes its change.

No, backend B wasn't a good citizen: it should have been holding
exclusive lock on the buffer.

> Also, as hints, would it be Bad(tm) if an attempt to clear one failed?

Clearing hint bits is also an exclusive-lock-only operation.  Notice
I specified that *setting* them is the only case allowed to be done
with shared lock.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Zeugswetter Andreas SBDate: 2001-07-04 08:37:57
Subject: AW: Re: Backup and Recovery
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-07-04 03:16:24
Subject: Re: stuck spin lock with many concurrent users

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group