From: | Gurjeet Singh <gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im> |
---|---|
To: | Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Avoid unncessary always true test (src/backend/storage/buffer/bufmgr.c) |
Date: | 2023-06-14 16:32:12 |
Message-ID: | CABwTF4UkJzNkDsYfECt-zEZd6eUtzUG0WyngtMAReQEsBwCeGQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 5:12 AM Ranier Vilela <ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Em qua., 14 de jun. de 2023 às 06:51, Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> escreveu:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 3:39 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Gurjeet has mentioned that eb.rel cannot be modified by another
>>> process since the value or memory is in the local stack, and I believe
>>> he's correct.
>>>
>>> If the pointed Relation had been blown out, eb.rel would be left
>>> dangling, not nullified. However, I don't believe this situation
>>> happens (or it shouldn't happen) as the entire relation should already
>>> be locked.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, Gurjeet is right. I had a thinko here. eb.rel should not be NULL
>> pointer in any case. And as we've acquired the lock for it, it should
>> not have been closed. So I think we can remove the check for eb.rel in
>> the two places.
>
> Ok,
> As there is a consensus on removing the tests and the comment is still relevant,
> here is a new version for analysis.
LGTM.
Best regards,
Gurjeet
http://Gurje.et
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tristan Partin | 2023-06-14 16:42:03 | Re: BUG #17946: LC_MONETARY & DO LANGUAGE plperl - BUG |
Previous Message | Tristan Partin | 2023-06-14 15:58:06 | Re: Use COPY for populating all pgbench tables |