On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 12:33 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 2:52 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>>>> Amit, can you please split the buffer manager changes in this patch
>>>> into a separate patch?
>>> Sure, attached patch extend_bufmgr_api_for_hash_index_v1.patch does that.
>> The additional argument to ConditionalLockBuffer() doesn't seem to be
>> used anywhere in the main patch.  Do we actually need it?
> No, with latest patch of concurrent hash index, we don't need it.  I
> have forgot to remove it.  Please find updated patch attached.  The
> usage of second parameter for ConditionalLockBuffer() is removed as we
> don't want to allow I/O across content locks, so the patch is changed
> to fallback to twice locking the metapage.


Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to