| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Zhang Mingli <zmlpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Issue in GIN fast-insert: XLogBeginInsert + Read/LockBuffer ordering |
| Date: | 2022-10-25 04:58:20 |
| Message-ID: | 3956139.1666673900@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 02:22:16PM +0200, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> I confess I don't understand why is it important that XLogBeginInsert is
>> called inside the critical section. It seems to me that that part is
>> only a side-effect of having to acquire the buffer locks in the critical
>> section. Right?
> Yeah, you are right that it would not matter for XLogBeginInsert(),
> though I'd like to think that this is a good practice on consistency
> grounds with anywhere else, and we respect what's documented in the
> README.
Yeah --- it's documented that way, and there doesn't seem to be
a good reason not to honor that here.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-10-25 05:09:32 | Re: GUC values - recommended way to declare the C variables? |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2022-10-25 04:30:29 | Re: Issue in GIN fast-insert: XLogBeginInsert + Read/LockBuffer ordering |