Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> I don't especially like the Asserts inside spinlocks, either.
>
> > I didn't change these. It doesn't look to me that these asserts are
> > worth very much as production code.
>
> OK. If we ever see these hit in the buildfarm I might argue for
> reconsidering, but without some evidence of that sort it's not
> worth much concern.
Sure. I would be very surprised if buildfarm ever exercises this code.
> > I think the latch is only used locally. Seems that it was only put in
> > shmem to avoid a separate variable ...
>
> Hm, I'm strongly tempted to move it to a separate static variable then.
> That's not a bug fix, so maybe it only belongs in HEAD, but is there
> value in keeping the branches in sync in this code? It sounded from
> your commit message like they were pretty different already :-(
Well, there were conflicts in almost every branch, but they were pretty
minor.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
