Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to content

Commit d5e3d1e

Browse files
committed
Fix thinko in lock mode enum
Commit 0e5680f contained a thinko mixing LOCKMODE with LockTupleMode. This caused misbehavior in the case where a tuple is marked with a multixact with at most a FOR SHARE lock, and another transaction tries to acquire a FOR NO KEY EXCLUSIVE lock; this case should block but doesn't. Include a new isolation tester spec file to explicitely try all the tuple lock combinations; without the fix it shows the problem: starting permutation: s1_begin s1_lcksvpt s1_tuplock2 s2_tuplock3 s1_commit step s1_begin: BEGIN; step s1_lcksvpt: SELECT * FROM multixact_conflict FOR KEY SHARE; SAVEPOINT foo; a 1 step s1_tuplock2: SELECT * FROM multixact_conflict FOR SHARE; a 1 step s2_tuplock3: SELECT * FROM multixact_conflict FOR NO KEY UPDATE; a 1 step s1_commit: COMMIT; With the fixed code, step s2_tuplock3 blocks until session 1 commits, which is the correct behavior. All other cases behave correctly. Backpatch to 9.3, like the commit that introduced the problem.
1 parent 2ea9595 commit d5e3d1e

File tree

4 files changed

+537
-2
lines changed

4 files changed

+537
-2
lines changed

src/backend/access/heap/heapam.c

+4-2
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -6102,6 +6102,7 @@ DoesMultiXactIdConflict(MultiXactId multi, uint16 infomask,
61026102
int nmembers;
61036103
MultiXactMember *members;
61046104
bool result = false;
6105+
LOCKMODE wanted = tupleLockExtraInfo[lockmode].hwlock;
61056106

61066107
allow_old = !(infomask & HEAP_LOCK_MASK) && HEAP_XMAX_IS_LOCKED_ONLY(infomask);
61076108
nmembers = GetMultiXactIdMembers(multi, &members, allow_old,
@@ -6113,11 +6114,12 @@ DoesMultiXactIdConflict(MultiXactId multi, uint16 infomask,
61136114
for (i = 0; i < nmembers; i++)
61146115
{
61156116
TransactionId memxid;
6116-
LockTupleMode memlockmode;
6117+
LOCKMODE memlockmode;
61176118

61186119
memlockmode = LOCKMODE_from_mxstatus(members[i].status);
6120+
61196121
/* ignore members that don't conflict with the lock we want */
6120-
if (!DoLockModesConflict(memlockmode, lockmode))
6122+
if (!DoLockModesConflict(memlockmode, wanted))
61216123
continue;
61226124

61236125
/* ignore members from current xact */

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)