| From: | Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz, gurjeet(at)singh(dot)im, ranier(dot)vf(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Avoid unncessary always true test (src/backend/storage/buffer/bufmgr.c) |
| Date: | 2023-06-14 09:50:41 |
| Message-ID: | CAMbWs48ihqQKK=6vBrL75fQoAv8dc3ahJBGyyiDz3YDFAxbTuA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 3:39 PM Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:
> Gurjeet has mentioned that eb.rel cannot be modified by another
> process since the value or memory is in the local stack, and I believe
> he's correct.
>
> If the pointed Relation had been blown out, eb.rel would be left
> dangling, not nullified. However, I don't believe this situation
> happens (or it shouldn't happen) as the entire relation should already
> be locked.
Yeah, Gurjeet is right. I had a thinko here. eb.rel should not be NULL
pointer in any case. And as we've acquired the lock for it, it should
not have been closed. So I think we can remove the check for eb.rel in
the two places.
Thanks
Richard
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Richard Guo | 2023-06-14 09:52:53 | Re: Replace (GUC_UNIT_MEMORY | GUC_UNIT_TIME) with GUC_UNIT in guc.c |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2023-06-14 09:44:23 | Re: Do we want a hashset type? |