From: | Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, John Naylor <johncnaylorls(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Question on LWLockMode in dsa.c |
Date: | 2024-02-06 10:18:14 |
Message-ID: | CAFiTN-soqsDw+vpNOEu4fxp_0WZxGrpwwjtpsfcEms-0PBjMiw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 6:24 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> While working on radix tree patch[1], John Naylor found that dsa.c
> doesn't already use shared locks even in dsa_dump(). dsa_dump() seems
> a pure read-only function so I thought we could use a shared lock mode
> there. Is there any reason to use exclusive mode even in dsa_dump()?
>
> Ultimately, since we're trying to add a new function
> dsa_get_total_size() that just returns
> dsa_area_control.total_segment_size and therefore would also be a
> read-only function, I'd like to find out the correct lock mode there.
>
Doesn't seem like there is any reason for this to be an exclusive lock.
--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker | 2024-02-06 10:19:21 | Re: doc patch: Spell I/O consistently |
Previous Message | Anthonin Bonnefoy | 2024-02-06 10:13:09 | Re: POC: Extension for adding distributed tracing - pg_tracing |