Re: GIN pending list clean up exposure to SQL

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

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