Thread
Commits
-
Remove obsolete comments about sempahores from proc.c.
- cb9242efe0ab 9.5.19 landed
- fe755edc5c76 9.6.15 landed
- df098c371b88 10.10 landed
- f7aebd7f7411 11.5 landed
- 25b93a2967a4 12.0 landed
-
Move deadlock and other interrupt handling in proc.c out of signal handlers.
- 6753333f55e1 9.5.0 cited
-
Obsolete comments about semaphores in proc.c
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> — 2019-06-13T23:00:30Z
Hi, Commit 6753333f switched from a semaphore-based waiting to latch-based waiting for ProcSleep()/ProcWakeup(), but left behind some stray references to semaphores. PSA. -- Thomas Munro https://enterprisedb.com
-
Re: Obsolete comments about semaphores in proc.c
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> — 2019-06-17T11:28:42Z
> On 14 Jun 2019, at 01:00, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote: > Commit 6753333f switched from a semaphore-based waiting to latch-based > waiting for ProcSleep()/ProcWakeup(), but left behind some stray > references to semaphores. PSA. LGTM cheers ./daniel
-
Re: Obsolete comments about semaphores in proc.c
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2019-06-17T13:20:38Z
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:28:42PM +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >> On 14 Jun 2019, at 01:00, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Commit 6753333f switched from a semaphore-based waiting to latch-based >> waiting for ProcSleep()/ProcWakeup(), but left behind some stray >> references to semaphores. PSA. > > LGTM Fine seen from here as well. I am not spotting other areas, FWIW. -- Michael