Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Hrm, this doesn't look right at all.
> Aargh. I thought I had checked this pretty carefully before
> committing that last patch.
No, sorry, my mistake: I assumed your first commit hadn't touched the
probes at all, which I now see wasn't true. It does appear to be
consistent now.
> buffer-flush-start and buffer-flush-done are documented as only
> getting called for shared buffers, so there is no point in passing a
> backend ID that will always be -1. buffer-write-dirty-start and
> buffer-write-dirty-done are not documented as applying only to shared
> buffers, but I believe it to be the case: they are called from
> BufferAlloc, which appears to be shared-buffers-only code.
I wonder though whether we should take the opportunity to generalize the
probe definitions so that they would work for local buffers. But maybe
nobody really cares.
regards, tom lane
