Re: [PATCH] introduce XLogLockBlockRangeForCleanup()

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Amit Khandekar <amit(dot)khandekar(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] introduce XLogLockBlockRangeForCleanup()
Date: 2014-07-03 11:29:34
Message-ID: CA+U5nMLSHYFkwTaHFg+jO3gvOL3aUOkEeWZUwXBOhgM-KBEyyQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 3 July 2014 06:45, Amit Khandekar <amit(dot)khandekar(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:

> In GetBufferWithoutRelcache(), I was wondering, rather than calling
> PinBuffer(), if we do this :
> LockBufHdr(buf);
> PinBuffer_Locked(buf);
> valid = ((buf->flags & BM_VALID) != 0);
> then we can avoid having the new buffer access strategy BAS_DISCARD that is
> introduced in this patch. And so the code changes in freelist.c would not be
> necessary.

That looks like a good idea, thanks.

I think we should say this though

LockBufHdr(buf);
valid = ((buf->flags & BM_VALID) != 0);
if (valid)
PinBuffer_Locked(buf);
else
UnlockBufHdr(buf);

since otherwise we would access the buffer flags without the spinlock
and we would leak a pin if the buffer was not valid

--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2014-07-03 12:27:53 Re: gaussian distribution pgbench
Previous Message Abhijit Menon-Sen 2014-07-03 10:51:59 Re: [PATCH] introduce XLogLockBlockRangeForCleanup()