| From: | Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213(at)163(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Thomas Munro <tmunro(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: the s_lock_stuck on perform_spin_delay |
| Date: | 2024-01-15 05:19:56 |
| Message-ID: | 8734uz17va.fsf@163.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 10:17 PM Andy Fan <zhihuifan1213(at)163(dot)com> wrote:
>> fixed in v2.
>
> Timing the spinlock wait seems like a separate patch from the new sanity checks.
Yes, a separate patch would be better, so removed it from v4.
> I suspect that the new sanity checks should only be armed in
> assert-enabled builds.
There are 2 changes in v4. a). Make sure every code is only armed in
assert-enabled builds. Previously there was some counter++ in non
assert-enabled build. b). Record the location of spin lock so that
whenever the Assert failure, we know which spin lock it is. In our
internal testing, that helps a lot.
--
Best Regards
Andy Fan
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v4-0001-Detect-more-misuse-of-spin-lock-automatically.patch | text/x-diff | 9.1 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vignesh C | 2024-01-15 05:43:32 | Re: BRIN indexes vs. SK_SEARCHARRAY (and preprocessing scan keys) |
| Previous Message | jian he | 2024-01-15 05:00:00 | Re: Compile warnings in dbcommands.c building with meson |