From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Gurjeet Singh" <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Clarence Gardner" <clarence(at)silcom(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Not your father's question about deadlocks |
Date: | 2006-11-16 21:01:58 |
Message-ID: | 964.1163710918@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
"Gurjeet Singh" <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 11/17/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> we need a special case when we are already a member of the MultiXact:
>> fall through without trying to reacquire the tuple lock.
> Small implementation detail: Also keep a count of how many times the same
> session requested the same lock, and do not release the lock until he
> requests same number of releases.
No need for that, because there isn't any heap_unlock_tuple.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | One | 2006-11-16 21:03:20 | Extract between year *and* month |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2006-11-16 20:59:33 | Re: How to crash postgres using savepoints |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2006-11-16 21:07:35 | Re: [HACKERS] Not your father's question about deadlocks |
Previous Message | Gurjeet Singh | 2006-11-16 20:49:34 | Re: [HACKERS] Not your father's question about deadlocks |