On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, we can write code that way, but then it is better to rely just > on retain_pin variable in the function and add an Assert for bucket > page whenever we are retaining pin. How about doing something like > attached patch?
Committed. >> Not sure exactly how that >> works out in terms of locking. > > We have to change the locking order as mentioned above by me. This > change is already present in that patch, so maybe we add the check as > suggested by you along with that patch. Now, another thing we could > do is to extract those changes from WAL patch, but I am not sure if it > is worth the effort. I'm not sure at this point, either. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
