| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com, masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Cannot shutdown subscriber after DROP SUBSCRIPTION |
| Date: | 2017-02-02 05:13:12 |
| Message-ID: | 1289.1486012392@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> Then, the reason for the TRY-CATCH cluase is that I found that
> some functions called from there can throw exceptions.
Yes, but all LWLocks should be released by normal error recovery.
It should not be necessary for this code to clean that up by hand.
If it were necessary, there would be TRY-CATCH around every single
LWLockAcquire in the backend, and we'd have an unreadable and
unmaintainable system. Please don't add a TRY-CATCH unless it's
*necessary* -- and you haven't explained why this one is.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2017-02-02 05:16:12 | Re: Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM) |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2017-02-02 05:10:17 | Re: Should `pg_upgrade --check` check relation filenodes are present? |