Re: Cleanup: PGProc->links doesn't need to be the first field anymore
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Cleanup: PGProc->links doesn't need to be the first field anymore |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20240704202046.ox7yj3gaback6722@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Cleanup: PGProc->links doesn't need to be the first field anymore (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>) |
Ответы |
Re: Cleanup: PGProc->links doesn't need to be the first field anymore
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hi, On 2024-07-04 01:54:18 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > pgproc.h has this: > > > struct PGPROC > > { > > /* proc->links MUST BE FIRST IN STRUCT (see ProcSleep,ProcWakeup,etc) */ > > dlist_node links; /* list link if process is in a list */ > > dlist_head *procgloballist; /* procglobal list that owns this PGPROC */ > > ... > > I don't see any particular reason for 'links' to be the first field. We used > to do things like "proc = (PGPROC *) waitQueue->links.next", but since > commit 5764f611e1, this has been a "dlist", and dlist_container() can handle > the list link being anywhere in the struct. Indeed. > I tried moving it and ran the regression tests. That revealed one place > where we still don't use dlist_container: > > > if (!dlist_is_empty(procgloballist)) > > { > > MyProc = (PGPROC *) dlist_pop_head_node(procgloballist); > > ... > > I believe that was just an oversight. Trivial patch attached. Oops. Yes, I clearly should have used dlist_container() here. +1 Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: