| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Bossart, Nathan" <bossartn(at)amazon(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com" <sulamul(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: inefficient loop in StandbyReleaseLockList() |
| Date: | 2021-10-31 20:37:48 |
| Message-ID: | 20211031203748.sbef53i57dq6t7xr@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2021-10-31 15:38:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yeah, there's no expectation that this data structure needs to be kept
> consistent after an error; and I'm not real sure that the existing
> code could claim to satisfy such a requirement if we did need it.
To be clear, I was making that comment in response to the search for
other places doing the while(!empty) delete_first() style loops. Some of
them are reached via resowners etc, where reaching the same code
repeatedly is perhaps more realistic.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2021-10-31 20:38:04 | Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box? |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2021-10-31 20:16:33 | Re: should we enable log_checkpoints out of the box? |