This has been saved for the 8.4 release: http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches_hold
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pavan Deolasee wrote: > On 4/11/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > [ itch... ] The problem is with time-extended execution of > > GetSnapshotData; what happens if the other guy lost the CPU for a good > > long time while in the middle of GetSnapshotData? He might set his > > xmin based on info you saw as long gone. > > > > You might be correct that it's safe, but the argument would have to > > hinge on the OldestXmin process being unable to commit because of > > someone holding shared ProcArrayLock; a point you are definitely not > > making above. (Study the comments in GetSnapshotData for awhile, > > also those in xact.c's commit-related code.) > > > > > My argument was based on what you said above, but I obviously did not > state it well :) > > Anyways, I think its better to be safe and we agree that its not such a > bad thing to take exclusive lock on procarray because CIC is not something > that happens very often. Attached is a revised patch which takes exclusive > lock on the procarray, rest remaining the same. > > Thanks, > Pavan > > -- > > EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com [ Attachment, skipping... ] > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly