Re: Buffer access rules, and a probable bug - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From ncm@zembu.com (Nathan Myers)
Subject Re: Buffer access rules, and a probable bug
Date
Msg-id 20010703123619.H1466@store.zembu.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Buffer access rules, and a probable bug  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Buffer access rules, and a probable bug
List pgsql-hackers
On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 09:40:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> 4. It is considered OK to update tuple commit status bits (ie, OR the
> values HEAP_XMIN_COMMITTED, HEAP_XMIN_INVALID, HEAP_XMAX_COMMITTED, or
> HEAP_XMAX_INVALID into t_infomask) while holding only a shared lock and
> pin on a buffer.  This is OK because another backend looking at the tuple
> at about the same time would OR the same bits into the field, so there
> is little or no risk of conflicting update; what's more, if there did
> manage to be a conflict it would merely mean that one bit-update would
> be lost and need to be done again later.

Without looking at the code, this seems mad.  Are you sure?

Nathan Myers
ncm@zembu.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Matthew
Date:
Subject: Help with SI buffer overflow error
Next
From: "Rod Taylor"
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: Backup and Recovery