| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Assert failure when rechecking an exclusion constraint |
| Date: | 2011-06-06 02:33:06 |
| Message-ID: | 2134.1307327586@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 02:17:00PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Attached are two versions of a patch to fix this. The second one
>> modifies the code that tracks what's "pending" as per the above thought.
>> I'm not entirely sure which one I like better ... any comments?
> +1 for the second approach. It had bothered me that SetReindexProcessing() and
> ResetReindexProcessing() manipulated one thing, but ReindexIsProcessingIndex()
> checked something else besides. (That's still technically true, but the overall
> effect seems more natural.)
OK, done that way.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-06-06 04:12:32 | Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2011-06-06 02:23:33 | Re: Assert failure when rechecking an exclusion constraint |