principled order; in particular ensure that all shared resources
are released before we release transaction locks. The code used
to release locks before buffer pins, which might explain an ancient
note I have about a bufmgr assertion failure I'd seen once several
years ago, and been unable to reproduce since. (Theory: someone
trying to drop a relation might be able to reach FlushRelationBuffers
before the last user of the relation had gotten around to dropping
his buffer pins.)
left a reference to cube in a comment in the regression test (that also
shows up in the expected output). This doesn't cause any real problem,
but people who read the comment might be confused. Attached is a diff to
remove the reference.
Bruno Wolff III
On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 12:11:32AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> $ ./clusterdb
> psql: could not connect to server: No such file or directory
> Is the server running locally and accepting
> connections on Unix domain socket "/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432"?
> psql: could not connect to server: No such file or directory
> Is the server running locally and accepting
> connections on Unix domain socket "/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432"?
> clusterdb: While clustering peter, the following failed:
> $
>
> This could probably handled a little more gracefully.
Yes, sorry. A patch for this is attached. Please apply.
Alvaro Herrera
item, if the page containing the current item is split while the indexscan
is stopped and holds no read-lock on the page. The current item might
move right onto a page that the indexscan holds no pin on. In the prior
code this would allow btbulkdelete to reach and possibly delete the item,
causing 'my bits moved right off the end of the world!' when the indexscan
finally resumes. Fix by chaining read-locks to the right during
_bt_restscan and requiring btbulkdelete to LockBufferForCleanup on every
page it scans, not only those with deletable items. Per my pghackers
message of 25-May-02. (Too bad no one could think of a better way.)