From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix possible crash reading pg_stat_activity. |
Date: | 2017-01-05 18:15:39 |
Message-ID: | 8402.1483640139@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> No, I think backend-lifetime is right. The tranche registrations are
> all backend-local state, so there's no problem with backend A
> registering a string at one address and backend B registering a string
> at a different address. It's just important that neither of those
> strings goes away before the corresponding backend does.
Then I don't understand what's going on. Isn't the crash you fixed
because backend A was looking at the tranche containing the lock backend B
was blocked on? How can a tranche name local to backend B work?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-01-05 19:35:51 | pgsql: Fix possible leak of semaphore count. |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-01-05 18:09:32 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix possible crash reading pg_stat_activity. |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2017-01-05 18:19:34 | Re: [PATCH] Add GUCs for predicate lock promotion thresholds |
Previous Message | Joe Conway | 2017-01-05 18:12:19 | Re: ALTER SYSTEM for pg_hba.conf |