| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SAVEPOINTs and COMMIT performance |
| Date: | 2011-06-06 09:33:21 |
| Message-ID: | 4DEC9EE1.8040802@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 06.02.2011 23:09, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-02-06 at 12:11 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Did this ever get addressed?
>
> Patch attached.
>
> Seems like the easiest fix I can come up with.
> @@ -2518,7 +2518,7 @@ CommitTransactionCommand(void)
> case TBLOCK_SUBEND:
> do
> {
> - CommitSubTransaction();
> + CommitSubTransaction(true);
> s = CurrentTransactionState; /* changed by pop */
> } while (s->blockState == TBLOCK_SUBEND);
> /* If we had a COMMIT command, finish off the main xact too */
We also get into this codepath at RELEASE SAVEPOINT, in which case it is
wrong to not reassign the locks to the parent subtransaction.
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-06-06 09:40:40 | Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2011-06-06 08:38:39 | Re: BLOB support |