On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 6:20 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 4:34 PM Dilip Kumar <dilipbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I have modified 0001 and 0002 slightly, Basically, instead of two > > function CheckAndSetLockHeld and CheckAndReSetLockHeld, I have created > > a one function. > > > > +CheckAndSetLockHeld(LOCALLOCK *locallock, bool value) > > Can we rename the parameter as lock_held, acquired or something like > that so that it indicates what it intends to do and probably add a > comment for that variable atop of function?
Done -- Regards, Dilip Kumar EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
v9-0002-Add-assert-to-ensure-that-page-locks-don-t-partic.patch
Description: Binary data
v9-0003-Allow-relation-extension-lock-to-conflict-among-p.patch
Description: Binary data
v9-0001-Assert-that-we-don-t-acquire-a-heavyweight-lock-o.patch
Description: Binary data
v9-0004-Allow-page-lock-to-conflict-among-parallel-group-.patch
Description: Binary data
