| From: | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com |
| Cc: | masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com, sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: some review comments on logical rep code |
| Date: | 2017-04-19 08:43:17 |
| Message-ID: | 20170419.174317.114509231.horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At Wed, 19 Apr 2017 10:33:29 +0200, Petr Jelinek <petr(dot)jelinek(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote in <ed73a706-9e15-f137-2d55-f05361f2de9a(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> > Commit has been moved from after to before of the lock section.
> > This causes potential race condition. (As the same as the
> > potential dead-lock, I'm not sure it can cause realistic problem,
> > though..) Isn't it better to be after the lock section?
> >
>
> We just read catalogs so there should not be locking issues.
Some other process may modify it then go to there. With a kind of
priority inversion, the process may modify the data on the memory
*before* we modify it. Of course this is rather unrealistic,
though.
regards,
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kyotaro HORIGUCHI | 2017-04-19 08:45:01 | Re: some review comments on logical rep code |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2017-04-19 08:42:18 | Re: Proposal: Local indexes for partitioned table |