Tom Lane wrote:
Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
In fact, I think there's a small race condition in CVS HEAD:

Yeah, probably --- the original no-locking design didn't have any side
flags.  The reason you need the lock is for a backend to be sure that
a newly-started checkpoint is using its requested flags.  But the
detection of checkpoint termination is still the same.

Actually, the race condition I outlined isn't related to the flags. It's possible because RequestCheckpoint doesn't guarantee that a checkpoint is performed when there's been no WAL activity since last one.

I did use a new force-flag to fix it, but I'm sure there is other ways.

  Heikki Linnakangas

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?


Reply via email to