On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: >> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> > It's possible to compile the source tree with LOCK_DEBUG defined, but >> > the resulting postgres promptly dumps core, due to the fact that >> > user_lockmethod doesn't supply any value for trace_flag; thus, the >> > first LockReleaseAll(USER_LOCKMETHOD) dereferences a NULL pointer. >> > This is the result of the following commit: >> >> > commit 0180bd6180511875db046bf8ddcaa633a2952dfd >> >> +1 for just reverting that commit. I'm not sure how much use the >> LOCK_DEBUG infrastructure has in exactly its current form, but I can >> certainly imagine wanting to use it or some variant of it to debug >> tough problems. If it's gone entirely, people would have to reinvent >> most of it for that type of debugging. On the other side of the coin, >> I don't have a clear enough use-case for it to want to spend time >> right now on redesigning it, nor a clear idea of exactly what changes >> might make it more useful. So I think we should just revert and >> not spend additional effort now. > > I am confused. I thought it was lock_debug referencing user locks that > was broken. Does lock_debug need user locks?
It supports tracing them. The point is, they're not gone. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
