Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> writes: > ... But dc39e09942 added another blurb of code between > the loop and the cleanup. That blurb sometimes resets `ret` to zero, > making the cleanup code think that the locking was successful. > ... > The fix is simple: instead of just breaking out of the loop, jump > directly to the cleanup code. This fixes some tests in t1404 that were > added in the previous commit.
OK. Now because we do not break and start packed_transaction but instead jump over that if statement, we'll leave packed_transation instance that we got from transaction_begin() that we called add_update() on, but haven't called transaction_prepare() on behind. That instance is pointed by backend_data pointer which is part of transaction, so presumably transaction_cleanup() called on it in the section labelled "cleanup:" should take care of it? Thanks for catching the issue and fixing it quickly. Will queue.
