Re: FastPathStrongRelationLocks still has an issue in HEAD - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: FastPathStrongRelationLocks still has an issue in HEAD
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZFfmQVZg88CoqSA-qnb6+t4zAKBs7nPXx=TKSuV3ZJdg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: FastPathStrongRelationLocks still has an issue in HEAD  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> [ LockRefindAndRelease ] lacks an
>> Assert(FastPathStrongRelationLocks->count[fasthashcode] > 0).  I think
>> we should add one.
>
> Absolutely.

Turns out there were two places missing such an assertion: the 2PC
path, and the abort-strong-lock-acquire path.  I added an assertion to
both.  In theory, if the problem is coming from either of those
places, this might even increase the frequency of buildfarm failures,
since it removes the necessity for another normal-path release to hit
the same partition afterwards.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Hai Qian
Date:
Subject: Re: GSoC 2014: Implementing clustering algorithms in MADlib
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: B-Tree support function number 3 (strxfrm() optimization)