| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
|---|
| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Refactoring lock.c |
| Date: | 2005-02-02 19:41:15 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.OSF.4.61.0502022057370.463931@kosh.hut.fi |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Hi,
There's two almost identical pieces of code in LockRelease and
LockReleaseAll that do the opposite of GrantLock.
Here's a small patch that replaces those pieces with a static UnGrantLock
function.
This is preparation for the two-phase commit patch, since that introduces
more calls to UnGrantLock.
- Heikki
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| UnGrantLock.patch | text/plain | 5.4 KB |
| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Refactoring lock.c |
| Date: | 2005-02-03 00:00:08 |
| Message-ID: | 1107388808.26960.31.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 21:41 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> There's two almost identical pieces of code in LockRelease and
> LockReleaseAll that do the opposite of GrantLock.
>
> Here's a small patch that replaces those pieces with a static UnGrantLock
> function.
LockReleaseAll() did not update the holdMask bits for a released
proclock, but it will do so now. That's okay because we're removing the
proclock, right?
Barring any objections, I'll apply this to HEAD today or tomorrow.
-Neil
| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
|---|---|
| To: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Refactoring lock.c |
| Date: | 2005-02-03 15:34:28 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.OSF.4.61.0502031734040.127773@kosh.hut.fi |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-02-02 at 21:41 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> There's two almost identical pieces of code in LockRelease and
>> LockReleaseAll that do the opposite of GrantLock.
>>
>> Here's a small patch that replaces those pieces with a static UnGrantLock
>> function.
>
> LockReleaseAll() did not update the holdMask bits for a released
> proclock, but it will do so now. That's okay because we're removing the
> proclock, right?
Right.
- Heikki
| From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Cc: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Refactoring lock.c |
| Date: | 2005-02-04 02:06:06 |
| Message-ID: | 4202D88E.4060906@samurai.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> There's two almost identical pieces of code in LockRelease and
> LockReleaseAll that do the opposite of GrantLock.
>
> Here's a small patch that replaces those pieces with a static
> UnGrantLock function.
Applied to HEAD with a few trivial editorial fixes.
Thanks for the patch.
-Neil