On Sunday 27 December 2009 23:10:09 Simon Riggs wrote: > On Sun, 2009-12-27 at 20:12 +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > > While unlikely to cause issues two new LWLockAcquire calls use the wrong > > locking mode. > > Patch attached. > It's important to explain why you think something is a bug, rather than > make that claim on its own. Youre right.
My idea was that another SIGINT handler (e.g. normal client query cancel) is running while CONFLICT_MODE_FATAL is issued that might get ignored. Thus the fatal error might get ignored. But actually that was mostly my gut feeling - I am not really understanding the whole query cancellation process yet. (Its not exactly unlikely that my patch does not fix that though) I think that if under protection of a shared lock the protected objects gets altered, that definitely needs to be commented from my pov... In the reverse case its not as important but still a good idea. > However, I think I see a different issue with conflict handling, so > looking at this again was worthwhile, thanks. Will come back with more > over next few days. Cool. Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
