| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: lazy vxid locks, v3 |
| Date: | 2011-08-04 16:44:11 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZw3jnAs+4RiFmo0k385+mg3j94MMBc0ApccH0VFq-dfA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 12:12 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I guess you could look at that way. It just seemed like the obvious
>> way to write the code: we do LockRefindAndRelease() only if we have a
>> fast-path lock that someone else has pushed into the main table.
>
> OK, looks good to me. Marked "ready for committer".
Thanks for the review!
Committed.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2011-08-04 17:48:38 | Re: plperl crash with Debian 6 (64 bit), pl/perlu, libwww and https |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-08-04 16:28:31 | Re: error: could not find pg_class tuple for index 2662 |