On Mon, Nov 24, 2025, at 22:53, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2025, at 17:06, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Unfortunately, releasing locks, sending notifies, etc is not all
>> that "noncritical" if you want the DB to keep functioning well.
>> But there's a good deal of code in there and making it all
On Mon, Nov 24, 2025, at 17:06, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't think Joel did anybody any favors by separating this patch
> fragment from its larger context [1].
I'm a bit surprised by this. My intention in splitting it out
was based on earlier advice in [1] that I think made a lot of sense:
>> [...my
Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 23/11/2025 16:45, Joel Jacobson wrote:
>> This patch addresses this comment in async.c's SignalBackends:
>> * XXX in principle these pallocs could fail, which would be bad.
>> * Maybe preallocate the arrays? They're not that large, though.
> Ugh. I wonder if we sh
On 23/11/2025 16:45, Joel Jacobson wrote:
Hi hackers,
This patch addresses this comment in async.c's SignalBackends:
* XXX in principle these pallocs could fail, which would be bad.
* Maybe preallocate the arrays? They're not that large, though.
This is unsafe, since AtCommit_Notify
Hi hackers,
This patch addresses this comment in async.c's SignalBackends:
* XXX in principle these pallocs could fail, which would be bad.
* Maybe preallocate the arrays? They're not that large, though.
This is unsafe, since AtCommit_Notify effectively runs in a critical
section, so an
