Horton

Re: pgsql: Avoid spurious deadlocks when upgrading a tuple lock

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org, Etsuro Fujita <etsuro.fujita@gmail.com>
Date: 2019-06-14T15:37:36Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2019-Jun-14, Tom Lane wrote:

> I wrote:
> >> Hm, I don't get that warning.  Does this patch silence it, please?
> 
> > Uh, no patch attached?  But initializing the variable where it's
> > declared would certainly silence it.
> 
> BTW, after looking around a bit I wonder if this complaint isn't
> exposing an actual logic bug.  Shouldn't skip_tuple_lock have
> a lifetime similar to first_time?

I think you're right.  I should come up with a test case that exercises
that case.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Avoid spurious deadlocks when upgrading a tuple lock

  2. Revert "Avoid spurious deadlocks when upgrading a tuple lock"

  3. Silence compiler warning