RE: Quite strange crash
От | Mikheev, Vadim |
---|---|
Тема | RE: Quite strange crash |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A234D3249@sectorbase1.sectorbase.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Quite strange crash (Denis Perchine <dyp@perchine.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Quite strange crash
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> > START_/END_CRIT_SECTION is mostly CritSectionCount++/--. > > Recording could be made as > > LockedSpinLocks[LockedSpinCounter++] = &spinlock > > in pre-allocated array. > > Yeah, I suppose. We already do record locking of all the fixed > spinlocks (BufMgrLock etc), it's just the per-buffer spinlocks that > are missing from that (and CRIT_SECTION calls). Would it be > reasonable to assume that only one buffer spinlock could be held > at a time? No. UPDATE holds two spins, btree split even more. But stop - afair bufmgr remembers locked buffers, probably we could just add XXX_CRIT_SECTION to LockBuffer..? Vadim
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: