Hi, Victor!
On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 at 12:47, Victor Yegorov <vyegorov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hey.
>
> I find “Get rid of WALBufMappingLock" commit message misleading, 'cos Lock it's being replaced by CV, actually.
>
> Should the subject be changed to “Replace WALBufMappingLock with ConditionVariable” instead?
The patch replaces WALBufMappingLock with a lockless algorithm based
on atomic variables and CV. Mentioning only CV in the head is only a
part of implementation. Also, the header should better reflect what is
done on the whole, than the implementation details. So I'd rather see
a header like "Replace WALBufMappingLock by lockless algorithm" or
"Initialize WAL buffers concurrently without using WALBufMappingLock"
or something like that.
Kind regards,
Pavel Borisov
Supabase
