Re: Bug in new buffer freelist code - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: Bug in new buffer freelist code
Date
Msg-id 878ykjpnqt.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Bug in new buffer freelist code  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Bug in new buffer freelist code  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> It might be a good idea to rename BM_FREE to something else, perhaps
> BM_UNPINNED, since I can recall being confused about what it meant
> too.

If all it indicates is refcount == 0, ISTM we can just get rid of it
altogether, and just check the shared refcount directly.

> Also, if Jan likes the idea of adding a flag bit for this purpose,
> maybe there should be a flag bit associated with each of the ARC
> freelists, so you can tell positively where a "free" buffer is
> supposed to be.

Seems like a good idea to me...

-Neil



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andreas Pflug
Date:
Subject: Re: Dumb question: How do I determine programmatically
Next
From: Kurt Roeckx
Date:
Subject: Re: Brokenness in parsing of pg_hba.conf