From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: GIN pending list clean up exposure to SQL
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 14:18:46 -0200
Message-ID: <20151119161846.GK614468@alvherre.pgsql> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151119155222.GJ614468@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <CAMkU=1x8zFkpfnozXyt40zmR3Ub_kHu58LtRmwHUKRgQss7=iQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20151119155222.GJ614468@alvherre.pgsql>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Jeff Janes wrote:
> > I've written a function which allows users to clean up the pending list.
> > It takes the index name and returns the number of pending list pages
> > deleted.
>
> I just noticed that your patch uses AccessShareLock on the index. Is
> that okay? I would have assumed that you'd need ShareUpdateExclusive
> (same as vacuum uses), but I don't really know. Was that a carefully
> thought-out choice?
After reading gitPendingCleanup it becomes clear that there's no need
for a stronger lock than what you've chosen. Jaime Casanova just
pointed this out to me.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, 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
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, jeff.janes@gmail.com
Subject: Re: GIN pending list clean up exposure to SQL
In-Reply-To: <20151119161846.GK614468@alvherre.pgsql>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox