Heikki Linnakangas writes:
> On 11.01.2013 04:16, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Also, it looks like we'll need two code paths in PostPrepare_Locks to
>> deal with the possibility that a conflicting entry already exists?
>> I'm not sure this is possible, but I'm not sure it's not, either.
> If I understand t
On 11.01.2013 04:16, Tom Lane wrote:
[explanation of a race condition]
Good catch.
Also, it looks like we'll need two code paths in PostPrepare_Locks to
deal with the possibility that a conflicting entry already exists?
I'm not sure this is possible, but I'm not sure it's not, either.
If I
While looking at the lock code the other day, I noticed this comment in
PostPrepare_Locks():
/*
* We cannot simply modify proclock->tag.myProc to reassign
* ownership of the lock, because that's part of the hash key and
* the proclock would then b
