| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com, amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com, pasim(at)vmware(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: elog(DEBUG2 in SpinLocked section. |
| Date: | 2020-06-03 03:05:10 |
| Message-ID: | 20200603030510.GD89559@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 09:18:19AM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> Thanks to all!
Indeed, this was incorrect. And you may not have noticed, but we have
a second instance of that in LogicalIncreaseRestartDecodingForSlot()
that goes down to 9.4 and b89e151. I used a dirty-still-efficient
hack to detect that, and that's the only instance I have spotted.
I am not sure if that's worth worrying a back-patch, but we should
really address that at least on HEAD. Attached is an extra patch to
close the loop.
--
Michael
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| spinlock-elog-fix.patch | text/x-diff | 1.9 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2020-06-03 03:06:22 | Re: Should we remove a fallback promotion? take 2 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2020-06-03 02:47:50 | Re: Removal of currtid()/currtid2() and some table AM cleanup |