| From: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com, markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SSI patch version 14 |
| Date: | 2011-02-06 19:08:37 |
| Message-ID: | 1297019317.27157.157.camel@jdavis |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 2011-02-05 at 14:43 -0600, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" wrote:
>
> > So now that I'm sure we actually do need code there, I'll add it.
>
> In working on this I noticed the apparent need to move two calls to
> PredicateLockTuple a little bit to keep them inside the buffer lock.
> Without at least a share lock on the buffer, it seems that here is a
> window where a read could miss the MVCC from a write and the write
> could fail to see the predicate lock. Please see whether this seems
> reasonable:
>
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=users/kgrittn/postgres.git;a=commitdiff;h=7841a22648c3f4ae46f674d7cf4a7c2673cf9ed2
What does PredicateLockTuple do that needs a share lock? Does a pin
suffice?
Regards,
Jeff Davis
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2011-02-06 19:10:27 | Re: Add support for logging the current role |
| Previous Message | Euler Taveira de Oliveira | 2011-02-06 19:04:38 | Re: 64-bit pgbench V2 |