Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is it OK to commit the change before 7.1 release ?
> > I want to do it before forgetting this issue.
>
> If that fixes the problem for you, then commit it. I was waiting to
> hear back whether you still saw a crash or not...
>
I
Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is it OK to commit the change before 7.1 release ?
> I want to do it before forgetting this issue.
If that fixes the problem for you, then commit it. I was waiting to
hear back whether you still saw a crash or not...
regards, t
I Inoue wrote:
>
> Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > [ backtrace snipped ]
> >
> > Hmm, this is definitely not operating as intended: LockWaitCancel is
> > getting interrupted, because ProcessInterrupts may be called when it's
> > trying to acquire the lockman
Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I suspect you will find that these crashes occur during the window just
>> after
> Sorry what does 'just after' mean ?
> Isn't it during the semop() ?
>> the semop() call in IpcSemaphoreLock() --- see the comment
If an interrupt during the semop led
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > [ backtrace snipped ]
>
> Hmm, this is definitely not operating as intended: LockWaitCancel is
> getting interrupted, because ProcessInterrupts may be called when it's
> trying to acquire the lockmanager spinlock, and ProcessInterr
Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [ backtrace snipped ]
Hmm, this is definitely not operating as intended: LockWaitCancel is
getting interrupted, because ProcessInterrupts may be called when it's
trying to acquire the lockmanager spinlock, and ProcessInterrupts will
see the ProcDiePendi
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I sometimes encountered SEGV errors in my test case
> > when I canceled the execution.
>
> Can you provide backtraces from these SEGVs?
>
ISTM the backtrace isn't sufficient to figure out
how the error occured. As far as I see th
Hiroshi Inoue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I sometimes encountered SEGV errors in my test case
> when I canceled the execution.
Can you provide backtraces from these SEGVs?
> Probably it's due to the almost simultaneous arrival
> of multiple signals and the following patch seems to
> fix the bu
Hi,
I sometimes encountered SEGV errors in my test case
when I canceled the execution.
Probably it's due to the almost simultaneous arrival
of multiple signals and the following patch seems to
fix the bug. However I'm afraid that the change should
cause another bug.
Comments ?
Regards,
Hiroshi I
