database/postgres
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/postgres/postgres.git synced 2025-07-15 19:21:59 +03:00
Code Activity

pgindent run for 8.3.

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Bruce Momjian
2007-11-15 21:14:46 +00:00
parent 3adc760fb9
commit fdf5a5efb7
486 changed files with 10044 additions and 9664 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

65
src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c
View File

@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
*
*
* IDENTIFICATION
* $PostgreSQL: pgsql/src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c,v 1.196 2007/10/26 20:45:10 alvherre Exp $
* $PostgreSQL: pgsql/src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c,v 1.197 2007/11/15 21:14:38 momjian Exp $
*
*-------------------------------------------------------------------------
*/
@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ InitProcGlobal(void)
MemSet(AuxiliaryProcs, 0, NUM_AUXILIARY_PROCS * sizeof(PGPROC));
for (i = 0; i < NUM_AUXILIARY_PROCS; i++)
{
AuxiliaryProcs[i].pid = 0; /* marks auxiliary proc as not in use */
AuxiliaryProcs[i].pid = 0; /* marks auxiliary proc as not in use */
PGSemaphoreCreate(&(AuxiliaryProcs[i].sem));
}
@ -362,7 +362,7 @@ InitProcessPhase2(void)
*
* Auxiliary processes are presently not expected to wait for real (lockmgr)
* locks, so we need not set up the deadlock checker. They are never added
* to the ProcArray or the sinval messaging mechanism, either. They also
* to the ProcArray or the sinval messaging mechanism, either. They also
* don't get a VXID assigned, since this is only useful when we actually
* hold lockmgr locks.
*/
@ -734,7 +734,7 @@ ProcSleep(LOCALLOCK *locallock, LockMethod lockMethodTable)
PROC_QUEUE *waitQueue = &(lock->waitProcs);
LOCKMASK myHeldLocks = MyProc->heldLocks;
bool early_deadlock = false;
bool allow_autovacuum_cancel = true;
bool allow_autovacuum_cancel = true;
int myWaitStatus;
PGPROC *proc;
int i;
@ -889,18 +889,18 @@ ProcSleep(LOCALLOCK *locallock, LockMethod lockMethodTable)
/*
* waitStatus could change from STATUS_WAITING to something else
* asynchronously. Read it just once per loop to prevent surprising
* asynchronously. Read it just once per loop to prevent surprising
* behavior (such as missing log messages).
*/
myWaitStatus = MyProc->waitStatus;
/*
* If we are not deadlocked, but are waiting on an autovacuum-induced
* task, send a signal to interrupt it.
* task, send a signal to interrupt it.
*/
if (deadlock_state == DS_BLOCKED_BY_AUTOVACUUM && allow_autovacuum_cancel)
{
PGPROC *autovac = GetBlockingAutoVacuumPgproc();
PGPROC *autovac = GetBlockingAutoVacuumPgproc();
LWLockAcquire(ProcArrayLock, LW_EXCLUSIVE);
@ -912,7 +912,7 @@ ProcSleep(LOCALLOCK *locallock, LockMethod lockMethodTable)
(autovac->vacuumFlags & PROC_IS_AUTOVACUUM) &&
!(autovac->vacuumFlags & PROC_VACUUM_FOR_WRAPAROUND))
{
int pid = autovac->pid;
int pid = autovac->pid;
elog(DEBUG2, "sending cancel to blocking autovacuum pid = %d",
pid);
@ -960,49 +960,50 @@ ProcSleep(LOCALLOCK *locallock, LockMethod lockMethodTable)
if (deadlock_state == DS_SOFT_DEADLOCK)
ereport(LOG,
(errmsg("process %d avoided deadlock for %s on %s by rearranging queue order after %ld.%03d ms",
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs)));
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs)));
else if (deadlock_state == DS_HARD_DEADLOCK)
{
/*
* This message is a bit redundant with the error that will
* be reported subsequently, but in some cases the error
* report might not make it to the log (eg, if it's caught by
* an exception handler), and we want to ensure all long-wait
* This message is a bit redundant with the error that will be
* reported subsequently, but in some cases the error report
* might not make it to the log (eg, if it's caught by an
* exception handler), and we want to ensure all long-wait
* events get logged.
*/
ereport(LOG,
(errmsg("process %d detected deadlock while waiting for %s on %s after %ld.%03d ms",
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs)));
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs)));
}
if (myWaitStatus == STATUS_WAITING)
ereport(LOG,
(errmsg("process %d still waiting for %s on %s after %ld.%03d ms",
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs)));
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs)));
else if (myWaitStatus == STATUS_OK)
ereport(LOG,
(errmsg("process %d acquired %s on %s after %ld.%03d ms",
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs)));
(errmsg("process %d acquired %s on %s after %ld.%03d ms",
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs)));
else
{
Assert(myWaitStatus == STATUS_ERROR);
/*
* Currently, the deadlock checker always kicks its own
* process, which means that we'll only see STATUS_ERROR
* when deadlock_state == DS_HARD_DEADLOCK, and there's no
* need to print redundant messages. But for completeness
* and future-proofing, print a message if it looks like
* someone else kicked us off the lock.
* process, which means that we'll only see STATUS_ERROR when
* deadlock_state == DS_HARD_DEADLOCK, and there's no need to
* print redundant messages. But for completeness and
* future-proofing, print a message if it looks like someone
* else kicked us off the lock.
*/
if (deadlock_state != DS_HARD_DEADLOCK)
ereport(LOG,
(errmsg("process %d failed to acquire %s on %s after %ld.%03d ms",
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs)));
MyProcPid, modename, buf.data, msecs, usecs)));
}
/*
* At this point we might still need to wait for the lock.
* Reset state so we don't print the above messages again.
* At this point we might still need to wait for the lock. Reset
* state so we don't print the above messages again.
*/
deadlock_state = DS_NO_DEADLOCK;
@ -1237,8 +1238,8 @@ CheckDeadLock(void)
/*
* Unlock my semaphore so that the interrupted ProcSleep() call can
* print the log message (we daren't do it here because we are inside
* a signal handler). It will then sleep again until someone
* releases the lock.
* a signal handler). It will then sleep again until someone releases
* the lock.
*
* If blocked by autovacuum, this wakeup will enable ProcSleep to send
* the cancelling signal to the autovacuum worker.
@ -1247,11 +1248,11 @@ CheckDeadLock(void)
}
/*
* And release locks. We do this in reverse order for two reasons:
* (1) Anyone else who needs more than one of the locks will be trying
* to lock them in increasing order; we don't want to release the other
* process until it can get all the locks it needs.
* (2) This avoids O(N^2) behavior inside LWLockRelease.
* And release locks. We do this in reverse order for two reasons: (1)
* Anyone else who needs more than one of the locks will be trying to lock
* them in increasing order; we don't want to release the other process
* until it can get all the locks it needs. (2) This avoids O(N^2)
* behavior inside LWLockRelease.
*/
check_done:
for (i = NUM_LOCK_PARTITIONS; --i >= 0;)