On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 06:22:05PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
> Previously the code looked somewhat safe to use in critical section like
> blocks (although whether it'd be good idea to use in one is a different
> question), but not after. Even if not used in a critical section, adding new
> failure conditions to low-level code that's holding LWLocks etc. doesn't seem
> like a good idea.
This is an interesting point. Would the addition of one or more
critical sections in this area impact its performance in any way?
> It also just increases the overhead of LockBuffer(). Adding palloc(), copying
> of process title, GetCurrentTimestamp() to a low level routine like this isn't
> free - even if it's mostly in the contended paths.
Good point.
--
Michael
