Re: Allocations in critical section (was Re: WAL format and API changes (9.5))
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Allocations in critical section (was Re: WAL format and API changes (9.5)) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5381.1396619798@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Allocations in critical section (was Re: WAL format and API changes (9.5)) (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Allocations in critical section (was Re: WAL format
and API changes (9.5))
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com> writes: > Ok, I fixed the issues that the assertion fixed. I also committed a > patch to add the assertion itself; let's see if the buildfarm finds more > cases that violate the rule. > It ignores the checkpointer, because it's known to violate the rule, ... uh, isn't that a bug to be fixed? > and > allocations in ErrorContext, which is used during error recovery, e.g if > you indeed PANIC while in a critical section for some other reason. Yeah, I realized we'd have to do something about elog's own allocations. Not sure if a blanket exemption for ErrorContext is the best way. I'd been thinking of having a way to turn off the complaint once processing of an elog(PANIC) has started. > I didn't backpatch this. Agreed. BTW, I'm pretty sure you added some redundant assertions in mcxt.c. eg, palloc does not need its own copy. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: