Message 75

RE: Scan destructor [Re: One more thing...]

X-Added: With Flames (bblib $Revision: 1.4 $)
Return-path: <vijayp+@cmu.edu>
X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail
Received: from po0.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for bb+academic.cs.15-721@andrew.cmu.edu
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr0/bb/Mailbox/8vkXYr600UdY5XLk52>;
          Mon,  8 Oct 2001 19:39:35 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mx1.andrew.cmu.edu (MX1.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.10.111])
        by po0.andrew.cmu.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA25435
        for <bb+academic.cs.15-721@ams.andrew.cmu.edu>; Mon, 8 Oct 2001 19:39:34 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ece.cmu.edu (ECE.CMU.EDU [128.2.136.200])
        by mx1.andrew.cmu.edu (8.12.0.Beta16/8.12.0.Beta16) with ESMTP id f98NdWeD031404;
        Mon, 8 Oct 2001 19:39:32 -0400
Received: from jayna (JAYNA.PDL.CMU.EDU [128.2.134.122])
        by ece.cmu.edu (8.11.0/8.10.2) with SMTP id f98NdXl14089;
        Mon, 8 Oct 2001 19:39:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Vijay Pandurangan" <vijayp+@cmu.edu>
To: <bb+academic.cs.15-721@andrew.cmu.edu>
Cc: <spapadim+@cs.cmu.edu>, "Anastassia Ailamaki" <natassa@andrew.cmu.edu>,
        "Vijay Pandurangan" <vijayp@andrew.cmu.edu>,
        "Mehmet Bakkaloglu" <mehmetb@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: RE: Scan destructor [Re: One more thing...]
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 19:39:33 -0400
Message-ID: <JNEMKAOIMCBDLCKNFHNBIEGDCAAA.vijayp+@cmu.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <3BC231B0.9070400@cs.cmu.edu>

Since Scan etc. are causing so much trouble, and since modifications / posts
about new ways to overcome these problems have been made to H files upto
just recently, is it possible for you to give us all an extension on the
project? It seems to me as though these setbacks / issues are worse than
what we encountered for project 1.

vijay

-----Original Message-----
From: Spiros Papadimitriou [mailto:spapadim+@cs.cmu.edu]
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 7:07 PM
To: deepay+@cs.cmu.edu
Subject: Scan destructor [Re: One more thing...]


>
>
>when heap_driver.C calls "delete scan", apparently the original destructor
>(Scan::Scan) gets called. I've defined MyScan::~MyScan to {}, but it still
>goes to Scan::~Scan, which tries to unpin some pages which I havent
>pinned. Any workaround???  [...]
>

If you are not using any of the Scan fields as suggested,
then you should be OK.  In particular, if datapage or
dirpage are not NULL, the destructor will try to unpin the
corresponding pages...  Let me know if there is still a
problem!

Spiros