Re: WARNING: missing lock on database "postgres" (OID 5) @ TID (0,4)

From: Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
Cc: Alexander Kukushkin <cyberdemn(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WARNING: missing lock on database "postgres" (OID 5) @ TID (0,4)
Date: 2024-12-10 09:14:32
Message-ID: CALdSSPj7T-Uq+wfZRbomMxtR+t6F+bg95FbrzJBzKBGbMheiyg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 at 10:47, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 at 10:45, Kirill Reshke <reshkekirill(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > PFA v2.
> Also CF entry https://commitfest.postgresql.org/51/5430/ to get CI feedback.

CI fails due to bad naming in the regression test.
The change is deptestdb1 -> regressdeptestdb1
PFA v3.

--
Best regards,
Kirill Reshke

Attachment Content-Type Size
v3-0001-When-making-dependency-changes-lock-the-tuple-for.patch application/octet-stream 5.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2024-12-10 09:15:48 Re: Memory leak in WAL sender with pgoutput (v10~)
Previous Message Kirill Reshke 2024-12-10 09:02:56 Re: Pass ParseState as down to utility functions.