Re: GIN pending list clean up exposure to SQL

On 19 November 2015 at 14:57, Jaime Casanova
<jaime(dot)casanova(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 19 November 2015 at 14:47, Jaime Casanova
> <jaime(dot)casanova(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>> On 19 November 2015 at 14:18, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>>> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>>>> Jeff Janes wrote:
>>>> > I've written a function which allows users to clean up the pending list.
>>>> > It takes the index name and returns the number of pending list pages
>>>> > deleted.
>>>>
>>>> I just noticed that your patch uses AccessShareLock on the index. Is
>>>> that okay? I would have assumed that you'd need ShareUpdateExclusive
>>>> (same as vacuum uses), but I don't really know. Was that a carefully
>>>> thought-out choice?
>>>
>>> After reading gitPendingCleanup it becomes clear that there's no need
>>> for a stronger lock than what you've chosen. Jaime Casanova just
>>> pointed this out to me.
>>>
>>
>> But it should do some checks, no?
>> - only superusers?
>> - what i received as parameter is a GIN index?
>>
>
> I just notice this:
>
> + ginInsertCleanup(&ginstate, true, &stats);
>
> ginInsertCleanup() now has four parameters, so you should update the call
>

Btw, this is not in the commitfest and seems like a useful thing to have

--
Jaime Casanova www.2ndQuadrant.com
Professional PostgreSQL: Soporte 24x7 y capacitación