Hi Melanie,
I remember I ever reviewed this patch. But when I revisit v7, I just got a confusion to clarify.
> On Nov 19, 2025, at 03:13, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2025 at 3:06 PM Melanie Plageman
> <melanieplageman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I found an incorrect assert in CleanVictimBuffer() that was tripping
>> in CI. Attached v6 is updated with it removed.
>
> v7 rebased over recent changes in bufmgr.c
>
> - Melanie
>
<v7-0001-Refactor-goto-into-for-loop-in-GetVictimBuffer.patch><v7-0002-Split-FlushBuffer-into-two-parts.patch><v7-0003-Eagerly-flush-bulkwrite-strategy-ring.patch>
0001 only changes “goto" to “for”, thus it's supposed no logic change.
In the old code:
```
if (strategy != NULL)
{
XLogRecPtr lsn;
/* Read the LSN while holding buffer header lock */
buf_state = LockBufHdr(buf_hdr);
lsn = BufferGetLSN(buf_hdr);
UnlockBufHdr(buf_hdr);
if (XLogNeedsFlush(lsn)
&& StrategyRejectBuffer(strategy, buf_hdr, from_ring))
{
LWLockRelease(content_lock);
UnpinBuffer(buf_hdr);
goto again;
}
}
```
It only retries when XLogNeedsFlush(lsn) is true.
In the patch, everything are merged into StrategyRejectBuffer():
```
if (StrategyRejectBuffer(strategy, buf_hdr, from_ring))
{
LWLockRelease(content_lock);
UnpinBuffer(buf_hdr);
continue;
}
```
When StrategyRejectBuffer(strategy, buf_hdr, from_ring) is true, retry happens. However, look into the function:
```
bool
StrategyRejectBuffer(BufferAccessStrategy strategy, BufferDesc *buf, bool from_ring)
{
XLogRecPtr lsn;
if (!strategy)
return false;
/* We only do this in bulkread mode */
if (strategy->btype != BAS_BULKREAD)
return false;
/* Don't muck with behavior of normal buffer-replacement strategy */
if (!from_ring ||
strategy->buffers[strategy->current] != BufferDescriptorGetBuffer(buf))
return false;
LockBufHdr(buf);
lsn = BufferGetLSN(buf);
UnlockBufHdr(buf);
if (XLogNeedsFlush(lsn))
return false;
```
When XLogNeedsFlush(lsn) is true, StrategyRejectBuffer returns false, thus no retry will happen, which is different
fromthe old logic, is that an intentional change?
Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/
