Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net> writes:
> How *certain* are we that a single freelist lock (that actually ONLY
> protects the freelist) would be that big a deal?
We used to have one. It was a big bottleneck --- and this was years
ago, when the buffer manager was much less scalable than it is today.
(IIRC, getting rid of a central lock was one of the main advantages
of the current clock sweep code over its predecessor.)
The real issue here is that in the modern code, we hardly ever actually
have anything in the freelist: only when a relation is dropped, or
something like that, do buffers ever get put to the freelist. So your
argument that removing a buffer from the freelist is cheaper than running
the clock sweep is largely missing the point. We'd have to run a clock
sweep in order to find something to put in the freelist.
regards, tom lane
