Re: lock_timeout GUC patch
Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>
From: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>
To: Jaime Casanova <jcasanov@systemguards.com.ec>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>, Hans-Juergen Schoenig <postgres@cybertec.at>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, Sándor Miglécz <sandor@cybertec.at>, Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Date: 2010-01-13T12:07:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Jaime Casanova írta: > 2010/1/13 Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb@cybertec.at>: > >> Tom Lane írta: >> >>> If this patch is touching those parts of relcache.c, it probably needs >>> rethinking. >>> >>> >> What I did there is to check the return value of LockRelationOid() >> > > the hunk was because a diference in the position (i guess patch accept > a hunk of reasonable size, assuming there is something like a > reasonable size for that) > Actually the reject was not because of the position difference, Tom's refactor changed one line in load_critical_index(): - ird = RelationBuildDesc(indexoid, NULL); + ird = RelationBuildDesc(indexoid, true); -- Bible has answers for everything. Proof: "But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." (Matthew 5:37) - basics of digital technology. "May your kingdom come" - superficial description of plate tectonics ---------------------------------- Zoltán Böszörményi Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH http://www.postgresql.at/