dbTalk Databases Forums  

Re: [PATCHES] [pgsql-hackers-win32] [BUGS] Win32 deadlock detection not working for Postgres8beta1

mailing.database.pgsql-bugs mailing.database.pgsql-bugs


Discuss Re: [PATCHES] [pgsql-hackers-win32] [BUGS] Win32 deadlock detection not working for Postgres8beta1 in the mailing.database.pgsql-bugs forum.



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old   
Tom Lane
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: [PATCHES] [pgsql-hackers-win32] [BUGS] Win32 deadlock detection not working for Postgres8beta1 - 09-06-2004 , 07:01 PM






"Magnus Hagander" <mha (AT) sollentuna (DOT) net> writes:
Quote:
[ fix broken CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS macro ]
Applied. I see how this might change detection of statement_timeout,
but I do not actually see what it's got to do with deadlock detection.
In the deadlock situation the process that needs to wake up is going
to be blocked on a semaphore, and so it's not going to be executing
CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS at all. How does this fix that case?

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match


Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old   
Tom Lane
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: [PATCHES] [pgsql-hackers-win32] [BUGS] Win32 deadlock detection not working for Postgres8beta1 - 09-07-2004 , 09:37 AM






"Magnus Hagander" <mha (AT) sollentuna (DOT) net> writes:
Quote:
How does this fix that case?

It doesn't. This is why the second version of the patch was required,
per http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql...9/msg00039.php.
Okay, I've applied the right version of the patch now ;-)

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo (AT) postgresql (DOT) org


Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old   
Magnus Hagander
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: [PATCHES] [pgsql-hackers-win32] [BUGS] Win32 deadlock detection not working for Postgres8beta1 - 09-10-2004 , 11:34 PM



Quote:
[ fix broken CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS macro ]
=20
Applied. I see how this might change detection of=20
statement_timeout, but I do not actually see what it's got to=20
do with deadlock detection.
In the deadlock situation the process that needs to wake up=20
is going to be blocked on a semaphore, and so it's not going=20
to be executing CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS at all. How does this=20
fix that case?
It doesn't. This is why the second version of the patch was required,
per http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql...9/msg00039.php.
It even specifically says this is so it fixes the deadlock issues and
not just statement_timeout :-)


//Magnus

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to majordomo (AT) postgresql (DOT) org


Reply With Quote
Reply




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.