Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu> writes:
> Attached is a patch to remove the lock protection for
> HeapTupleSatisfiesVacuum() in index code.
This patch scares the heck out of me. You need to offer some pretty
compelling performance reasons before I'd accept any part of it,
most especially this:
*** bufmgr.c 14 Apr 2006 03:38:55 -0000 1.207
--- bufmgr.c 6 Jun 2006 02:07:09 -0000
***************
*** 1686,1693 ****
bufHdr = &BufferDescriptors[buffer - 1];
Assert(PrivateRefCount[buffer - 1] > 0);
- /* here, either share or exclusive lock is OK */
- Assert(LWLockHeldByMe(bufHdr->content_lock));
/*
* This routine might get called many times on the same page, if we are
--- 1686,1691 ----
Changing a buffer you hold no lock on is a recipe for disaster.
Where is the performance-boost evidence that suggests we should
even take the time to analyze whether this is safe?
regards, tom lane
