On Sun, 2009-12-06 at 12:32 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > 3. The "Out of lock mem killer" in StandbyAcquireAccessExclusiveLock is > quite harsh. It aborts all read-only transactions. It should be enough > to kill just one random one, or maybe the one that's holding most locks. > Also, if there still isn't enough shared memory after killing all > backends, it goes into an infinite loop. I guess that shouldn't happen, > but it seems a bit squishy anyway. It would be nice to differentiate > between "out of shared mem" and "someone else is holding the lock" more > accurately. Maybe add a new return value to LockAcquire() for "out of > shared mem".
OK, will abort infinite loop by adding new return value. If people don't like having everything killed, they can add more lock memory. It isn't worth adding more code because its hard to test and unlikely to be an issue in real usage, and it has a clear workaround that is already mentioned in a hint. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
