Simon Riggs wrote: > On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 07:55 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> Making some effort to transfer locks instead of acquiring+releasing >> would eliminate the need for having extra lock space available when >> switching from hot standby mode to normal operation. > > This isn't very clear. You started by saying you were quite eager to > always grant and then release; this sounds like you don't want that now, > but you now again like the approach I had already attempted to take.
Yeah, I haven't made up my mind. What's in there now is certainly broken, so we need to do something. The simplest approach would be to revert the changes in lock_twophase_recover(), while transfering the locks with something like AtPrepare_Locks() would be more robust in the face of shared memory shortage. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
