| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |
| Date: | 2010-09-12 16:29:00 |
| Message-ID: | 9973.1284308940@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> writes:
> I glanced at the code, and I see (in OwnLatch()):
> + if (latch->owner_pid != 0)
> + elog(ERROR, "latch already owned");
> + latch->owner_pid = MyProcPid;
> But it looks like there may be a race there.
Yeah, that error check is only intended to catch gross logic errors,
not to guard against race conditions. I don't think we really could
prevent a race there without adding a spinlock, which seems like
overkill.
> ... why throw an ERROR there if it can't happen (or
> indicates an inconsistent state when it does happen)?
Are you suggesting that an Assert would be sufficient?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2010-09-12 17:13:19 | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2010-09-12 16:15:15 | Re: Interruptible sleeps (was Re: CommitFest 2009-07: Yay, Kevin! Thanks, reviewers!) |