On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 2:23 AM, Mithun Cy <mithun...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Ah, good catch. While I agree that there is probably no great harm
> from skipping the lock here, I think it would be better to just avoid
> throwing an error while we hold the lock. I think apw_dump_now() is
> the only place where that could happen, and in the attached version,
> I've fixed it so it doesn't do that any more. Independent of the
> correctness issue, I think the code is easier to read this way.
>
> I also realize that it's not formally sufficient to use
> PG_TRY()/PG_CATCH() here, because a FATAL would leave us in a bad
> state. Changed to PG_ENSURE_ERROR_CLEANUP().
>
>> 2) I also found one issue which was my own mistake in my previous patch 19.
>> In "apw_dump_now" I missed calling FreeFile() on first write error,
>> whereas on othercases I am already calling the same.
>> ret = fprintf(file, "<<" INT64_FORMAT ">>\n", num_blocks);
>> + if (ret < 0)
>> + {
>> + int save_errno = errno;
>> +
>> + unlink(transient_dump_file_path);
>
> Changed in the attached version.
Thanks for the patch, I have tested the above fix now it works as
described. From my test patch looks good, I did not find any other
issues.
--
Thanks and Regards
Mithun C Y
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
