On 2014-02-23 14:48:12 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > Currently the error handling of normal backends only does a > > LWLockReleaseAll() once CurrentTransactionState->state != TRANS_DEFAULT > > because it's called in AbortTransaction(). There's pretty damn few > > places that fiddle with lwlocks outside of a transaction command, but I > > still do wonder whether it'd wouldn't be a tad more robust to > > unconditionally do a LWLockReleaseAll(), just like other error handlers > > are doing? > > Why do that thing in particular, and not all the other things that > AbortTransaction() does?
Because the other things in AbortTransaction() should really only be relevant inside a transaction, but there's valid reasons to use lwlocks outside one. E.g. I think that before Robert and I added a LWLockReleaseAll() to WalSndErrorCleanup() the whole walsender code wasn't protected. I am not entirely sure there's a real problem there in the backbranches, but it's a fair amount of code, espcially around base backups... Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
