From: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Fujii Masao <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Assertion failure when the non-exclusive pg_stop_backup aborted. |
Date: | 2017-12-11 05:16:50 |
Message-ID: | CAB7nPqT=y4McsuN2MpsdrS5ztmSOb-5U=hCa7MEJVNvOvQuBrw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:24 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 4:13 AM, Michael Paquier
>> <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> I would just write "To
>>> avoid calling CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS which can happen when releasing a
>>> LWLock" and be done with it. There is no point to list a full function
>>> dependency list, which could change in the future with static routines
>>> of lwlock.c.
>
> Agreed. Updated the comment.
Robert actually liked adding the complete routine list. Let's see what
Fujii-san thinks at the end, there is still some time until the next
round of minor releases. Robert, if Fujii-san does not show up in
time, would you look at this patch? I won't fight if you rework the
comments the way you think is better :)
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Amit Langote | 2017-12-11 05:31:00 | Re: no partition pruning when partitioning using array type |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2017-12-11 05:13:21 | Re: BUG #14941: Vacuum crashes |