| From: | Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123(at)gmail(dot)com> | 
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Sergey Shinderuk <s(dot)shinderuk(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com, er(at)xs4all(dot)nl, joel(at)compiler(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: Schema variables - new implementation for Postgres 15 | 
| Date: | 2023-08-12 11:20:03 | 
| Message-ID: | 20230812112003.gkirnqlk4bgf47us@erthalion.local | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
> On Sat, Aug 12, 2023 at 09:28:19AM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 05:55:26PM +0200, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> >
> > Another confusing example was this one at the end of set_session_variable:
> >
> >     +	/*
> >     +	 * XXX While unlikely, an error here is possible. It wouldn't leak memory
> >     +	 * as the allocated chunk has already been correctly assigned to the
> >     +	 * session variable, but would contradict this function contract, which is
> >     +	 * that this function should either succeed or leave the current value
> >     +	 * untouched.
> >     +	 */
> >     +	elog(DEBUG1, "session variable \"%s.%s\" (oid:%u) has new value",
> >     +		 get_namespace_name(get_session_variable_namespace(svar->varid)),
> >     +		 get_session_variable_name(svar->varid),
> >     +		 svar->varid);
> >
> > It's not clear, which exactly error you're talking about, it's the last
> > instruction in the function.
>
> FTR I think I'm the one that changed that.  The error I was talking about is
> elog() itself (in case of OOM for instance), or even one of the get_* call, if
> running with log_level <= DEBUG1.  It's clearly really unlikely but still
> possible, thus this comment which also tries to explain why this elog() is not
> done earlier.
I see, thanks for clarification. Absolutely nitpicking, but the crucial
"that's why this elog is not done earlier" is only assumed in the
comment between the lines, not stated out loud :)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Julien Rouhaud | 2023-08-12 12:00:55 | Re: Schema variables - new implementation for Postgres 15 | 
| Previous Message | Alexander Lakhin | 2023-08-12 09:00:00 | Backend initialization may be blocked by locking the database relation id |