| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, tushar <tushar(dot)ahuja(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Error while creating subscription when server is running in single user mode |
| Date: | 2017-06-06 19:48:42 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYUY0GudgMRx5VpVbwk-LWzWi8QkG7O4TqS=LZGh0FQKg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> Latches work in single user mode, it's just that the new code for some
> reason uses uninitialized memory as the latch. As I pointed out above,
> the new code really should just use MyLatch instead of
> MyProc->procLatch.
We seem to have accumulated quite a few instance of that.
[rhaas pgsql]$ git grep MyLatch | wc -l
116
[rhaas pgsql]$ git grep 'MyProc->procLatch' | wc -l
33
Most of the offenders are in src/backend/replication, but there are
some that are related to parallelism as well (bgworker.c, pqmq.c,
parallel.c, condition_variable.c). Maybe we (you?) should just go and
change them all. I don't think using MyLatch instead of
MyProc->procLatch has become automatic for everyone yet.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-06-06 19:53:21 | Re: Error while creating subscription when server is running in single user mode |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-06-06 19:33:48 | Re: Fix performance degradation of contended LWLock on NUMA |