On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:23 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> MarkBufferDirty() always increment BufferUsage counter
>>> (shared_blks_dirtied) for dirty blocks whenever it dirties any
>>> bloc
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
>> MarkBufferDirty() always increment BufferUsage counter
>> (shared_blks_dirtied) for dirty blocks whenever it dirties any
>> block, whereas same is not true for MarkBufferDirtyHint().
>> Is
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 9:02 PM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> MarkBufferDirty() always increment BufferUsage counter
> (shared_blks_dirtied) for dirty blocks whenever it dirties any
> block, whereas same is not true for MarkBufferDirtyHint().
> Is there any particular reason for not incrementing
> shared_
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> MarkBufferDirty() always increment BufferUsage counter
> (shared_blks_dirtied) for dirty blocks whenever it dirties any
> block, whereas same is not true for MarkBufferDirtyHint().
> Is there any particular reason for not incrementing
> shared_
MarkBufferDirty() always increment BufferUsage counter
(shared_blks_dirtied) for dirty blocks whenever it dirties any
block, whereas same is not true for MarkBufferDirtyHint().
Is there any particular reason for not incrementing
shared_blks_dirtied in MarkBufferDirtyHint()?
With Regards,
Amit Ka