| From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Less than ideal error reporting in pg_stat_statements |
| Date: | 2015-10-02 23:23:59 |
| Message-ID: | CAM3SWZTwNKkeCN+n_ew2eLFrWT9+UcPRLUTyy_xWN12QzGORsA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> Actually, isn't that another bug? The fact that we don't do the same
> from within gc_qtexts() in normal cases, even with an exclusive lock
> held? We do this:
Ah, no. We check pgss->gc_count in any case, so it should be fine.
That will also make it safe to do the unlink() as outlined already,
because a new qtext_load_file() call from
pg_stat_statements_internal() (due to gc_count bump) will allocate the
file again by name.
--
Peter Geoghegan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2015-10-02 23:27:32 | Re: Less than ideal error reporting in pg_stat_statements |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2015-10-02 23:11:30 | Re: Less than ideal error reporting in pg_stat_statements |