Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query
От | Amit Kapila |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAA4eK1L3RjfB3gnvhP40i0T-V9UPkz3Y8SF-t7cV5eD4MXivXg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 10:35 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 7:54 AM, Thomas Munro >> PS I noticed that for BecomeLockGroupMember() we say "If we can't >> join the lock group, the leader has gone away, so just exit quietly" >> but for various other similar things we spew errors (most commonly >> seen one being "ERROR: could not map dynamic shared memory segment"). >> Intentional? > > I suppose I thought that if we failed to map the dynamic shared memory > segment, it might be down to any one of several causes; whereas if we > fail to join the lock group, it must be because the leader has already > exited. There might be a flaw in that thinking, though. > By the way, in which case leader can exit early? As of now, we do wait for workers to end both before the query is finished or in error cases. -- With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: