On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 3:21 PM Thomas Munro <thomas.mu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 11:25 AM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > On 2022-07-05 11:20:54 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > > > Since there were 6 places with I-hold-no-lock assertions, I shoved the > > > loop into a function so I could do: > > > > > > - Assert(!status->hash_table->find_locked); > > > + assert_no_lock_held_by_me(hash_table); > > > > I am a *bit* wary about the costs of that, even in assert builds - each of > > the > > partition checks in the loop will in turn need to iterate through > > held_lwlocks. But I guess we can also just later weaken them if it turns out > > to be a problem. > > Maybe we should add assertion support for arrays of locks, so we don't > need two levels of loop? Something like the attached?
Pushed.
