At 2014-08-20 11:07:44 +0300, hlinnakan...@vmware.com wrote:
I don't think the new GetBufferWithoutRelcache function is in line
with the existing ReadBuffer API. I think it would be better to add a
new ReadBufferMode - RBM_CACHE_ONLY? - that only returns the buffer if
it's already in cache,
On 07/07/2014 11:46 AM, Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote:
At 2014-07-07 14:02:15 +0530, amit.khande...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Other than some minor comments as mentioned below, I don't have any
more issues, it looks all good.
Thank you. (Updated patch attached.)
I don't think the new
On 4 July 2014 19:11, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Updated patch attached, thanks.
Amit: what's your conclusion from the review?
Other than some minor comments as mentioned below, I don't have any more
issues, it looks all good.
XLogLockBlockRangeForCleanup() function
At 2014-07-07 14:02:15 +0530, amit.khande...@enterprisedb.com wrote:
Other than some minor comments as mentioned below, I don't have any
more issues, it looks all good.
Thank you. (Updated patch attached.)
-- Abhijit
diff --git a/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtxlog.c
On 3 July 2014 16:59, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
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
Updated patch attached, thanks.
Amit: what's your conclusion from the review?
-- Abhijit
diff --git a/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtxlog.c b/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtxlog.c
index 5f9fc49..dc90c02 100644
--- a/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtxlog.c
+++ b/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtxlog.c
@@
At 2014-07-03 11:15:53 +0530, amit.khande...@enterprisedb.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
FYI, I've attached a patch that does what you suggested. I haven't done
anything else (i.e. testing) with it yet.
-- Abhijit
diff --git a/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtxlog.c b/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtxlog.c
index 5f9fc49..dc90c02 100644
--- a/src/backend/access/nbtree/nbtxlog.c
+++
On 3 July 2014 06:45, Amit Khandekar amit.khande...@enterprisedb.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
On 13 June 2014 14:10, Abhijit Menon-Sen a...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
nbtxlog.c:btree_xlog_vacuum() contains the following comment:
* XXX we don't actually need to read the block, we just need to
* confirm it is unpinned. If we had a special call into the
* buffer manager we
10 matches
Mail list logo
