| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Souvik Bhattacherjee <kivuosb(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Initializing LWLock Array from Server Code |
| Date: | 2019-05-01 00:26:03 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoabR=TVoun8qOFGyReo2LakcTeQcV-ts4LKFxoM3vLTXw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 5:52 PM Souvik Bhattacherjee <kivuosb(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Thank you for your reply and sorry that I couldn't reply earlier.
> Since I didn't get any response within a couple of days, I took the longer route -- changed the lwlock.h and lwlock.c
> for accommodating the lw locks for the shared hash table.
>
> I'll describe what I modified in the lwlock.h and lwlock.c and it seems to be working fine. Although I haven't got an opportunity
> to test it extensively. If you could let me know if I missed out anything that might cause problems later that would be great.
Well, I can't really vouch for your code on a quick look, but it
doesn't look insane.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-05-01 00:28:45 | walsender vs. XLogBackgroundFlush during shutdown |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-05-01 00:22:23 | Re: Adding a test for speculative insert abort case |