On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 at 10:11, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2020-11-27 20:22:41 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> > On 26/11/2020 04:50, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Craig Ringer writes:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 9:23 PM Ashutosh Bapat <
> ashutosh.bapat@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
Hi,
On 2020-11-27 20:22:41 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 26/11/2020 04:50, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Craig Ringer writes:
> > > On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 9:23 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > I'd prefer to make the lock self deadlock check run for production
> > > > builds, not just
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 11:08:49AM -0800, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 10:22 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> I've made the mistake of forgetting to release an LWLock many times,
>> leading to self-deadlock. And I just reviewed a patch that did that this
>> week [1]. You usually
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 10:22 AM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I've made the mistake of forgetting to release an LWLock many times,
> leading to self-deadlock. And I just reviewed a patch that did that this
> week [1]. You usually find that mistake very quickly when you start
> testing though, I don
On 26/11/2020 04:50, Tom Lane wrote:
Craig Ringer writes:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 9:23 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
I'd prefer to make the lock self deadlock check run for production
builds, not just cassert builds.
I'd like to register a strong objection to spending any cycles whatsoever
on th
Craig Ringer writes:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 9:23 PM Ashutosh Bapat
> wrote:
>> I'd prefer to make the lock self deadlock check run for production
>> builds, not just cassert builds.
I'd like to register a strong objection to spending any cycles whatsoever
on this. If you're using LWLocks in
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 9:23 PM Ashutosh Bapat
wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:47 AM Craig Ringer
> wrote:
> >> I am also seeing a pattern
> >> Assert(!LWLockHeldByMe());
> >> LWLockAcquire()
> >>
> >> at some places. Should we change LWLockAcquire to do
> >> Assert(!LWLockHeldByMe()) always
On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 11:47 AM Craig Ringer
wrote:
>> I am also seeing a pattern
>> Assert(!LWLockHeldByMe());
>> LWLockAcquire()
>>
>> at some places. Should we change LWLockAcquire to do
>> Assert(!LWLockHeldByMe()) always to detect such occurrences?
>
>
> I'm inclined not to, at least not wit
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 10:11 PM Ashutosh Bapat <
ashutosh.bapat@gmail.com> wrote:
> This looks useful. LWLockCheckSelfDeadlock() could use LWLockHeldByMe
> variant instead of copying that code with possibly a change in that
> function to return the required information.
>
Yes, possibly so. I
This looks useful. LWLockCheckSelfDeadlock() could use LWLockHeldByMe
variant instead of copying that code with possibly a change in that
function to return the required information.
I am also seeing a pattern
Assert(LWLockHeldByMe*())
LWLockAcquire()
at some places. Should we change LWLockAcquir
10 matches
Mail list logo