| From: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | andres(at)anarazel(dot)de |
| Cc: | bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com, masao(dot)fujii(at)oss(dot)nttdata(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Inconsistency in startup process's MyBackendId and procsignal array registration with ProcSignalInit() |
| Date: | 2021-10-19 07:24:51 |
| Message-ID: | 20211019.162451.31816452832572753.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
(This branch may should leave from this thread..)
At Fri, 15 Oct 2021 15:00:57 +0900 (JST), Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote in
> At Thu, 14 Oct 2021 10:53:06 -0700, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote in
> > This'd get rid of the need of density *and* make SIInsertDataEntries()
> > cheaper.
>
> Yes. So.. I tried that. The only part where memory-flush timing is
> crucial seems to be between writing messages and setting maxMsgNum.
> By placing memory barrier between them it seems *to me* we can read
> maxMsgNum safely without locks.
Maybe we need another memory barrier here and the patch was broken
about the rechecking on the members in GetSIGetDataEntries..
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Onder Kalaci | 2021-10-19 07:38:49 | UPDATE on Domain Array that is based on a composite key crashes |
| Previous Message | Alexander Pyhalov | 2021-10-19 06:56:45 | Re: Partial aggregates pushdown |