RE: [HACKERS] NOTICE: LockRelease: locktable lookup failed, no lock

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Keith Parks" <emkxp01(at)mtcc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>
Cc: <hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] NOTICE: LockRelease: locktable lookup failed, no lock
Date: 1999-12-22 00:19:31
Message-ID: 000001bf4c12$376ee500$2801007e@cadzone.tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith Parks [mailto:emkxp01(at)mtcc(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk]
>
> "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
> >> >I'm not sure it's possible or not.
> >> >If startup sequence in InitPostgres() is changed,we may hardly
> >> >find the place to start transaction during backend startup.
> >> >
> >> >Seems the unique place we could call StartTransacationCommand()
> >> >during backend startup is between InitCatalogCahe() and InitUserId()
> >> >in InitPostgres() now.
> >> >I tried the following patch and it seems work at least now.
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >> Hiroshi
> >>
> >> I concur, after application of this patch I've not had a single
> >> lock NOTICE: error in the regression tests.
> >>
> >
> >Thanks.
> >
> >I'm not sure my patch has no problem.
> >May I dare to commit it to current tree ?
> >
>
> I've not seen any problems so-far.
>
> Can you commit your patch for wider testing?
>

OK,I have commited the patch to current tree now.
I had no time to do it yesterday,sorry.

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue
Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tatsuo Ishii 1999-12-22 04:31:04 pg_ctl updated
Previous Message Ed Loehr 1999-12-21 23:40:36 Re: [HACKERS] Re: QUESTION: Replication