Re: SSI work for 9.1

From: Dan Ports <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SSI work for 9.1
Date: 2011-06-09 03:59:43
Message-ID: 20110609035943.GK26076@csail.mit.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 09:17:04PM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> A patch is attached which just covers the predicate lock acquisition,
> where a snapshot is available without too much pain. There are two
> functions which acquire predicate locks where a snapshot was not
> readily available: _bt_search() and _bt_get_endpoint(). Not only was
> it not clear how to get a snapshot in, it was not entirely clear from
> reading the code that we need to acquire predicate locks here. Now,
> I suspect that we probably do, because I spent many long hours
> stepping through gdb to pick the spots where they are, but that was
> about a year ago and my memory of the details has faded.

For _bt_search(), the lock calls should move to _bt_first() where the
ScanDesc is available. This also keeps us from trying to take locks
during _bt_pagedel(), which is only called during vacuum and recovery.

The call in _bt_get_endpoint() seems unnecessary, because after it
returns, _bt_endpoint() takes the same lock. The only other callers of
_bt_get_endpoint() are _bt_pagedel() and _bt_insert_parent(), neither
of which should take predicate locks.

I've updated the patch, attached.

Dan

--
Dan R. K. Ports MIT CSAIL http://drkp.net/

Attachment Content-Type Size
ssi-predlock-snapshot-3.patch text/x-diff 15.5 KB

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Smith 2011-06-09 04:14:53 Core Extensions relocation
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2011-06-09 03:40:01 Re: SSI work for 9.1