Re: SSI bug? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kevin Grittner
Subject Re: SSI bug?
Date
Msg-id 4D943BEC020000250003BFDA@gw.wicourts.gov
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SSI bug?  (yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp (YAMAMOTO Takashi))
Responses Re: SSI bug?
Re: SSI bug?
List pgsql-hackers
YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamt@mwd.biglobe.ne.jp> wrote:

> hoge=# select locktype,count(*) from pg_locks group by locktype;
> -[ RECORD 1 ]--------
> locktype | virtualxid
> count    | 1
> -[ RECORD 2 ]--------
> locktype | relation
> count    | 1
> -[ RECORD 3 ]--------
> locktype | tuple
> count    | 7061

I've stared at the code for hours and have only come up with one
race condition which can cause this, although the window is so small
it's hard to believe that you would get this volume of orphaned
locks.  I'll keep looking, but if you could try this to see if it
has a material impact, that would be great.

I am very sure this patch is needed and that it is safe.  It moves a
LWLockAcquire statement up to cover the setup for the loop that it
already covers.  It also includes a fix to a comment that got missed
when we switched from the pointer between lock targets to
duplicating the locks.

-Kevin


Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bernd Helmle
Date:
Subject: wal_buffers = -1 and SIGHUP
Next
From: rsmogura
Date:
Subject: Re: 2nd Level Buffer Cache