On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Teodor Sigaev <teo...@sigaev.ru> wrote:

>       if (buf->usage_count < BM_MAX_USAGE_COUNT)
>>     being prone to paranoia, I prefer the first, but I've seen both
>> styles in
>>     the code so I don't know if it's worth futzing with.
>> Ok, let's be paranoic and do this same way as before.  Revised patch is
>> attached.
> I see the change was done in 9.6 release cycle in commit
> 48354581a49c30f5757c203415aa8412d85b0f70 at April, 10. Does it mean the
> fix should be backpatched too?

I think so.  This patch reverts unintentional change and can be considered
as bug fix.
BTW, sorry for unicode filename in previous letter.
Patch with normal ASCII name is attached.

Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

Attachment: put-buffer-usagecount-logic-back-2.patch
Description: Binary data

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

Reply via email to