| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "lingce(dot)ldm" <lingce(dot)ldm(at)alibaba-inc(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Problem with synchronous replication |
| Date: | 2019-10-30 13:00:12 |
| Message-ID: | 20191030130012.GD20808@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 05:21:17PM +0900, Fujii Masao wrote:
> This change causes every ending backends to always take the exclusive lock
> even when it's not in SyncRep queue. This may be problematic, for example,
> when terminating multiple backends at the same time? If yes,
> it might be better to check SHMQueueIsDetached() again after taking the lock.
> That is,
>
> if (!SHMQueueIsDetached(&(MyProc->syncRepLinks)))
> {
> LWLockAcquire(SyncRepLock, LW_EXCLUSIVE);
> if (!SHMQueueIsDetached(&(MyProc->syncRepLinks)))
> SHMQueueDelete(&(MyProc->syncRepLinks));
> LWLockRelease(SyncRepLock);
> }
Makes sense. Thanks for the suggestion.
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Antonin Houska | 2019-10-30 13:44:18 | MarkBufferDirtyHint() and LSN update |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-10-30 12:02:07 | Re: Unix-domain socket support on Windows |