On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 08:12 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > Is the "&& LocalTransactionIdIsValid(lxid)" a guard against calling
>> > VirtualXactLockTableCleanup twice? Can that happen? Or is it just
>> > defensive coding to avoid making an additional assumption?
>> lxid there is just a local variable storing the value that we
>> extracted from fpLocalTransactionId while holding the lock. I named
>> it that way just as a mnemonic for the type of value that it was, not
>> intending to imply that it was copied from MyProc->lxid.
> I know, this is the other purpose of fpLocalTransactionId that I was
> talking about. Is it just a guard against calling
> VirtualXactLockTableCleanup twice?
I guess you could look at that way. It just seemed like the obvious
way to write the code: we do LockRefindAndRelease() only if we have a
fast-path lock that someone else has pushed into the main table.
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Joshua D. Drake||Date: 2011-08-01 16:42:01|
|Subject: PgWest CFP extended for 12 days|
|Previous:||From: Dean Rasheed||Date: 2011-08-01 16:04:48|
|Subject: Compressing the AFTER TRIGGER queue|