| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <rhaas(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Code cleanup in the wake of recent LWLock refactoring. |
| Date: | 2016-02-10 16:08:43 |
| Message-ID: | 56BB608B.10002@iki.fi |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On 10/02/16 17:12, Robert Haas wrote:
> Code cleanup in the wake of recent LWLock refactoring.
>
> As of commit c1772ad9225641c921545b35c84ee478c326b95e, there's no
> longer any way of requesting additional LWLocks in the main tranche,
> so we don't need NumLWLocks() or LWLockAssign() any more. Also,
> some of the allocation counters that we had previously aren't needed
> any more either.
(Sorry if this was discussed already, I haven't been paying attention)
LWLockAssign() is used by extensions. Are we OK with just breaking them,
requiring them to change LWLockAssign() with the new mechanism, with
#ifdefs to support multiple server versions? Seems like it shouldn't be
too hard to keep LWLockAssign() around for the benefit of extensions, so
it seems a bit inconsiderate to remove it.
- Heikki
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-02-10 16:21:31 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Code cleanup in the wake of recent LWLock refactoring. |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-02-10 15:12:53 | pgsql: Code cleanup in the wake of recent LWLock refactoring. |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-02-10 16:12:21 | Re: Updated backup APIs for non-exclusive backups |
| Previous Message | David Steele | 2016-02-10 16:07:23 | Re: Updated backup APIs for non-exclusive backups |