Re: Various silliness in heap_getnext and related routines - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From bruc@stone.congenomics.com (Robert E. Bruccoleri)
Subject Re: Various silliness in heap_getnext and related routines
Date
Msg-id 200106091628.MAA78032@stone.congenomics.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Various silliness in heap_getnext and related routines  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Various silliness in heap_getnext and related routines  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Dear Tom,
> 
> 
> Robert Bruccoleri (bruc@stone.congen.com) wrote:
> > It's not clear to me why the spinlock needs be grabbed at the
> > beginning of RelationGetBufferWithBuffer,
> 
> I believe you are right: the spinlock doesn't need to be grabbed,
> because if a valid buffer is passed in, it must already be pinned
> (since the returned buffer is expected to be pinned).  Hence the check
> for same-buffer could be done without first grabbing the spinlock.

For my immediate problem, would removing the spinlock acquisition
be OK?

Thanks for looking into this problem.

Sincerely,
Bob

+----------------------------------+------------------------------------+
| Robert E. Bruccoleri, Ph.D.      | Phone: 609 737 6383                |
| President, Congenomics, Inc.     | Fax:   609 737 7528                |
| 114 W Franklin Ave, Suite K1,4,5 | email: bruc@acm.org                |
| P.O. Box 314                     | URL:   http://www.congen.com/~bruc |
| Pennington, NJ 08534             |                                    |
+----------------------------------+------------------------------------+


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: grant and SQL92
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: ERROR: Memory exhausted in AllocSetAlloc(909324558)