From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Subject: | Re: pg_filedump 9.3: checksums (and a few other fixes) |
Date: | 2013-06-10 05:28:10 |
Message-ID: | 20130610052810.GE15368@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Davis wrote:
> --- 1000,1015 ----
> strcat (flagString, "HASEXTERNAL|");
> if (infoMask & HEAP_HASOID)
> strcat (flagString, "HASOID|");
> + if (infoMask & HEAP_XMAX_KEYSHR_LOCK)
> + strcat (flagString, "XMAX_KEYSHR_LOCK|");
> if (infoMask & HEAP_COMBOCID)
> strcat (flagString, "COMBOCID|");
> if (infoMask & HEAP_XMAX_EXCL_LOCK)
> strcat (flagString, "XMAX_EXCL_LOCK|");
> ! if (infoMask & HEAP_XMAX_SHR_LOCK)
> ! strcat (flagString, "XMAX_SHR_LOCK|");
> ! if (infoMask & HEAP_XMAX_LOCK_ONLY)
> ! strcat (flagString, "XMAX_LOCK_ONLY|");
> if (infoMask & HEAP_XMIN_COMMITTED)
> strcat (flagString, "XMIN_COMMITTED|");
> if (infoMask & HEAP_XMIN_INVALID)
Hm, note that XMAX_SHR_LOCK is two bits, so when that flag is present
you will get the three lock modes displayed with the above code, which is
probably going to be misleading. htup_details.h does this:
/*
* Use these to test whether a particular lock is applied to a tuple
*/
#define HEAP_XMAX_IS_SHR_LOCKED(infomask) \
(((infomask) & HEAP_LOCK_MASK) == HEAP_XMAX_SHR_LOCK)
#define HEAP_XMAX_IS_EXCL_LOCKED(infomask) \
(((infomask) & HEAP_LOCK_MASK) == HEAP_XMAX_EXCL_LOCK)
#define HEAP_XMAX_IS_KEYSHR_LOCKED(infomask) \
(((infomask) & HEAP_LOCK_MASK) == HEAP_XMAX_KEYSHR_LOCK)
Presumably it'd be better to do something similar.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2013-06-10 06:03:12 | Re: pg_filedump 9.3: checksums (and a few other fixes) |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2013-06-10 05:17:32 | Re: Eliminating PD_ALL_VISIBLE, take 2 |