Re: SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock
Date
Msg-id 4DEE5B74.8020204@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 07.06.2011 20:03, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Heikki Linnakangas<heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>  wrote:
>
>> We've also already removed the reserved entry for scratch space
>
> This and Tom's concerns have me wondering if we should bracket the
> two sections of code where we use the reserved lock target entry
> with HOLD_INTERRUPTS() and RESUME_INTERRUPTS().

That's not necessary. You're holding a lwlock, which implies that 
interrupts are held off already. There's a HOLD_INTERRUPTS() call in 
LWLockAcquire and RESUME_INTERRUPTS() in LWLockRelease.

--   Heikki Linnakangas  EnterpriseDB   http://www.enterprisedb.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch