On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 8:52 PM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> As such there is no problem in saying the way you have mentioned, but
> I feel it would be better if we can mention the mechanism of _bt_search()
> as quoted by you upthread in the first line.
> "> In more concrete terms, _bt_search() releases and only then acquires
>> read locks during a descent of the tree (by calling
>> _bt_relandgetbuf()), and, perhaps counterintuitively, that's just
>> fine."
I guess I could say that too.
> One more point, why you think it is important to add this new text
> on top? I think adding new text after "Lehman and Yao don't require read
> locks, .." paragraph is okay.
I've added it to the top because it's really the most important point
on Lehman and Yao. It's the _whole_ point. Consider how it's
introduced here, for example:
http://db.cs.berkeley.edu/jmh/cs262b/treeCCR.html
Why should I "bury the lead"?
--
Peter Geoghegan
