Re: Errors on missing pg_subtrans/ files with 9.3 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Errors on missing pg_subtrans/ files with 9.3
Date
Msg-id 20131125211141.GC23284@alap2.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Errors on missing pg_subtrans/ files with 9.3  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2013-11-25 18:06:30 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > I mean that in the !KEYS_UPDATED case we don't need to abort if we're
> > only acquiring a key share...
> 
> Hm, I think that's correct -- we don't need to abort.  But we still need
> to wait until the updater completes.  So this proposed patch is not the
> full story.

Hm. Why do we need to wait in that case? Isn't the entire point of KEY
SHARE locks *not* having to wait for !KEYS_UPDATED? ISTM in that case we
should only check whether the creating transaction has aborted because
in that case we don't need to take out a lock?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- Andres Freund                       http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training &
Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Johnston
Date:
Subject: Re: why semicolon after begin is not allowed in postgresql?
Next
From: Kevin Grittner
Date:
Subject: Re: why semicolon after begin is not allowed in postgresql?