Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Code cleanup in the wake of recent LWLock refactoring.
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Code cleanup in the wake of recent LWLock refactoring. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFj8pRBMScq+jTZZdyGuQ2beexHM=Zkx30sVRmXHPs0iv=Mh0A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Code cleanup in the wake of recent LWLock refactoring. (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Code cleanup in the wake of recent
LWLock refactoring.
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2016-02-12 14:10 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>:
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 3:33 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote:
>> There will be necessary more changes than this. Orafce has some parts
>> based on lw locks. I am able to compile it without any issue. But the lock
>> mechanism is broken now - so impact on extensions will be higher. Have to do
>> some research.
>
> if somebody would to use it for testing
>
> https://github.com/orafce/orafce
> https://github.com/orafce/orafce/commit/fff56ed7e17ed5d6f8e6b71591ff1a6d6ff12d79
>
> With last commit I am able to compile orafce without warnings, but
> installcheck is broken. It can be bug in orafce, but this code worked last 7
> years.
That's very strange. It looks to me like you did exactly the right
thing. Can you provide any details on how it fails?
Looks like some race conditions is there - but I didn't tested it deeper
Pavel
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: