| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe |
| Date: | 2012-01-03 20:57:56 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMKPYF96t85fcEFHbEFSfMqCkMFo7rmNdvG7-YzOmW0guQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> If there are many call sites, maybe it'd be a good idea to use a
> semantic patcher tool such as Coccinelle instead of doing it one by one.
Thanks for the suggestion, regrettably I've already made those changes.
After examining the call sites, I identified 35 that might need
changing. Of those, about 30 were changed to use systable_beginscan,
while a few others use declared snapshots instead. So not a great
effort and worth doing the by-hand inspection.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2012-01-03 21:07:13 | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-01-03 20:55:02 | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe |