On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 6:30 AM Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 6:41 AM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > I just noticed, while working on a patch adding things to PGPROC, that > > the group clearning patches for the proc array and clog reset atomics in > > InitProcess(). > > > > I'm not a big fan of that, because it means that it's not safe to look > > at the atomics of backends that aren't currently in use. Is there any > > reason to not instead initialize them in InitProcGlobal() and just > > assert in InitProcess() that they're 0? If they're not, we'd be in deep > > trouble anyway, no? > > I think you are correct. I think it would be better in general for > InitProcess() to Assert() rather than reinitializing. >
Okay, changed the code as per Andres's and your suggestion. Do you think the attached change makes sense? I think we should backpatch this. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
fix_atomic_init_group_clear_v1.patch
Description: Binary data
