Re: BUG #14208: Inconsistent code modification - 3

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: petrum(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: BUG #14208: Inconsistent code modification - 3
Date: 2016-06-30 16:51:51
Message-ID: 8651.1467305511@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2016-06-30 12:40:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Whether or not the toplevel transaction is empty, by the time we get here
>> it would have nentries == nentries_mem, no?

> Not, if the top-level transaction spilled to disk.

But doesn't the code stanza just above this loop pull that spillage back in?
It's certainly doing *something* to txn->nentries_mem.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2016-06-30 16:55:42 Re: BUG #14208: Inconsistent code modification - 3
Previous Message Andres Freund 2016-06-30 16:47:12 Re: BUG #14208: Inconsistent code modification - 3