Re: Use of ActiveSnapshot
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Use of ActiveSnapshot |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26999.1179171340@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Use of ActiveSnapshot (Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Use of ActiveSnapshot
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Jan Wieck <JanWieck@Yahoo.com> writes: > The only problem with that is that there are code paths that set > ActiveSnapshot to palloc()'d memory that is released due to a > MemoryContextDelete() without resetting ActiveSnapshot to NULL. Only at the very end of a transaction (where ActiveSnapshot *is* reset to null, in FreeXactSnapshot); otherwise we'd have bugs unrelated to RevalidateCachedPlan. Eventually I would like to have reference-counted snapshots managed by a centralized module, as was discussed a month or two back; but right at the moment I don't think it's broken and I don't want to spend time on intermediate solutions. > I think it would be cleaner if RevalidateCachedPlan()'s API would have a > Snapshot argument. How does that improve anything? AFAICS the only thing that would ever get passed is ActiveSnapshot, so this is just more notation to do exactly the same thing. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: