| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, Etsuro Fujita <etsuro(dot)fujita(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Avoid spurious deadlocks when upgrading a tuple lock |
| Date: | 2019-06-14 15:37:36 |
| Message-ID: | 20190614153736.GA21626@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-Jun-14, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> >> Hm, I don't get that warning. Does this patch silence it, please?
>
> > Uh, no patch attached? But initializing the variable where it's
> > declared would certainly silence it.
>
> BTW, after looking around a bit I wonder if this complaint isn't
> exposing an actual logic bug. Shouldn't skip_tuple_lock have
> a lifetime similar to first_time?
I think you're right. I should come up with a test case that exercises
that case.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Gierth | 2019-06-14 18:24:50 | Re: UCT (Re: pgsql: Update time zone data files to tzdata release 2019a.) |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2019-06-14 15:34:29 | pgsql: Silence compiler warning |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2019-06-14 15:40:36 | Re: Allow table AM's to cache stuff in relcache |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-06-14 15:32:53 | Re: pgsql: Avoid spurious deadlocks when upgrading a tuple lock |