Re: Condition variable live lock

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Condition variable live lock
Date: 2018-01-08 11:41:36
Message-ID: CAEepm=1jfBU6F6aW-uvt+c698TmcwsjYhS8jC47YAvm6=kE7qQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jan 8, 2018 at 5:25 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 7, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Actually ... perhaps a better design would be to have
>> ConditionVariable[PrepareTo]Sleep auto-cancel any prepared sleep for
>> a different condition variable, analogously to what we just did in
>> ConditionVariableBroadcast, on the same theory that whenever control
>> returns to the other CV wait loop it can re-establish the relevant
>> state easily enough. I have to think that if the use of CVs grows
>> much, the existing restriction is going to become untenable anyway,
>> so why not just get rid of it?
>
> +1
>
> It's a more robust API this way.

One very small thing after another look:

- Assert(cv_sleep_target == NULL);
+ if (cv_sleep_target != NULL)
+ ConditionVariableCancelSleep();

The test for cv_sleep_target != NULL is redundant since
ConditionVariableCancelSleep() would return early.
ConditionVariableBroadcast() doesn't do that.

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2018-01-08 13:14:11 Re: pgsql: Implement channel binding tls-server-end-point for SCRAM
Previous Message Antonin Houska 2018-01-08 11:29:52 Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Incremental sort