Re: [HACKERS] some review comments on logical rep code
От | Petr Jelinek |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] some review comments on logical rep code |
Дата | |
Msg-id | c2cfda3b-9335-2b57-e9ee-a55a8646afcd@2ndquadrant.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] some review comments on logical rep code (Fujii Masao <masao.fujii@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] some review comments on logical rep code
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 18/04/17 19:27, Fujii Masao wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 1:35 AM, Petr Jelinek > <petr.jelinek@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> Thank you for working on this! >> >> On 18/04/17 10:16, Masahiko Sawada wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI >>> <horiguchi.kyotaro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> 10. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> SpinLockAcquire(&MyLogicalRepWorker->relmutex); >>>>>>>>> MyLogicalRepWorker->relstate = >>>>>>>>> GetSubscriptionRelState(MyLogicalRepWorker->subid, >>>>>>>>> MyLogicalRepWorker->relid, >>>>>>>>> &MyLogicalRepWorker->relstate_lsn, >>>>>>>>> false); >>>>>>>>> SpinLockRelease(&MyLogicalRepWorker->relmutex); >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Non-"short-term" function like GetSubscriptionRelState() should not >>>>>>>>> be called while spinlock is being held. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One option is adding new LWLock for the relation state change but this >>>>>>>> lock is used at many locations where the operation actually doesn't >>>>>>>> take time. I think that the discussion would be needed to get >>>>>>>> consensus, so patch for it is not attached. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From the point of view of time, I agree that it doesn't seem to >>>>>>> harm. Bt I thing it as more significant problem that >>>>>>> potentially-throwable function is called within the mutex >>>>>>> region. It potentially causes a kind of dead lock. (That said, >>>>>>> theoretically dosn't occur and I'm not sure what happens by the >>>>>>> dead lock..) >>>>>>> >> >> Hmm, I think doing what I attached should be fine here. > > Thanks for the patch! > >> We don't need to >> hold spinlock for table read, just for changing the >> MyLogicalRepWorker->relstate. > > Yes, but the update of MyLogicalRepWorker->relstate_lsn also should > be protected with the spinlock. > Yes, sorry tired/blind, fixed. -- Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: