Re: [PATCH] introduce XLogLockBlockRangeForCleanup()

From: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Amit Khandekar <amit(dot)khandekar(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] introduce XLogLockBlockRangeForCleanup()
Date: 2014-07-03 06:11:39
Message-ID: 20140703061139.GF10574@toroid.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At 2014-07-03 11:15:53 +0530, 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.

Thanks for the suggestion. It sounds sensible at first glance. I'll
think about it a little more, then try it and see.

> > will follow up with some performance numbers soon.
>
> Yes, that would be nice.

I'm afraid I haven't had a chance to do this yet.

-- Abhijit

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2014-07-03 06:29:32 Re: TODO : Allow parallel cores to be used by vacuumdb [ WIP ]
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2014-07-03 05:48:50 Re: WAL replay bugs