Re: WAL dirty-buffer management bug - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: WAL dirty-buffer management bug
Date
Msg-id 8049.1143815780@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WAL dirty-buffer management bug  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: WAL dirty-buffer management bug
List pgsql-hackers
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Problem for indexes only. heap xlrecs don't specify exact insert points

Sure they do.  They had better, else (for example) the associated index
insertions will be wrong.

> Accesses to local buffers don't need to be critical sections either.

True, but in most places it would uglify the code quite a bit to make it
like that, because START/END_CRIT_SECTION are bracketing code that is
shared between both cases.  And I'm not seeing where we'd get any
particular reliability gain from it: if the code has any significant
risk of elog'ing during the critical section, it's broken anyway ...
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL dirty-buffer management bug
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL dirty-buffer management bug