Hi,
dsm_attach() does the following:
nitems = dsm_control->nitems;
for (i = 0; i < nitems; ++i)
{
/* If the reference count is 0, the slot is actually unused. */
if (dsm_control->item[i].refcnt == 0)
continue;
/*
* If the reference count is 1, the slot is still in use, but
the
* segment is in the process of going away. Treat that as if we
* didn't find a match.
*/
if (dsm_control->item[i].refcnt == 1)
break;
/* Otherwise, if the descriptor matches, we've found a match. */
if (dsm_control->item[i].handle == seg->handle)
{
dsm_control->item[i].refcnt++;
seg->control_slot = i;
break;
}
}
The break because of refcnt == 1 doesn't generally seem to be a good
idea. Why are we bailing if there's *any* segment that's in the process
of being removed? I think the check should be there *after* the
dsm_control->item[i].handle == seg->handle check?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
