From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Deferring some AtStart* allocations? |
Date: | 2014-10-21 16:00:00 |
Message-ID: | 20141021160000.GD5790@alap3.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2014-10-09 15:01:19 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> /*
> @@ -960,18 +966,38 @@ AtEOXact_Inval(bool isCommit)
...
> + /*
> + * We create invalidation stack entries lazily, so the parent might
> + * not have one. Instead of creating one, moving all the data over,
> + * and then freeing our own, we can just adjust the level of our own
> + * entry.
> + */
> + if (myInfo->parent == NULL || myInfo->parent->my_level < my_level - 1)
> + {
> + myInfo->my_level--;
> + return;
> + }
> +
I think this bit might not be correct. What if the subxact one level up
aborts? Then it'll miss dealing with these invalidation entries. Or am I
misunderstanding something?
I like the patch, except the above potential issue.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2014-10-21 16:19:55 | Re: Question about RI checks |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2014-10-21 15:52:09 | Re: Deferring some AtStart* allocations? |