[asterisk-dev] [Code Review]: Resolve odbc segfaults by adding shared locks around usage of odbc handle in res_odbc

[jrose]

> On Feb. 27, 2012, 2:09 a.m., wdoekes wrote:
> > Looks good to go. I just hope that using exclusive locks for every query won't cause significant delays.
> 
> jrose wrote:
>     If it's any consolation, we can still do rwlocks in trunk once rmudgett merges his ao2 rwlock stuff in.
> 
> Tilghman Lesher wrote:
>     I would strongly caution against that, due to the way that your code was escalating locks.  If you're really worried about the locks causing a bottleneck, you should be using separate connections (which is supported already).

Alright then. I personally won't be pursuing that further unless the issue ends up on a sprint down the road anyway.


- jrose


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1719/#review5648
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Feb. 24, 2012, 4:44 p.m., jrose wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1719/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 24, 2012, 4:44 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers, Mark Michelson, Tilghman Lesher, rmudgett, and wdoekes.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> This is a continuation of wdoekes patch seen in https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1622/
> This adds Tilghman Lesher's suggested changes.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug ASTERISK-19011.
>     https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-19011
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /branches/1.8/res/res_odbc.c 354164 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/1719/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> I started by confirming that the segfault could be easily reproduced with wdoekes' setup mentioned in the issue report.
> After finishing the changes to the patch, I confirmed that following the same steps no longer produced the segfault, undid the patch to double check that I was doing it right, and then decided it was safe to post this review.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> jrose
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20120227/1cd4901a/attachment.htm>