| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: bufmgr code cleanup |
| Date: | 2003-11-03 15:00:25 |
| Message-ID: | 14227.1067871625@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> Neil Conway wrote:
>> This patch cleans up some of the bufmgr code:
> Can this be held off a little while we're experimenting with
> improvements to the buffer algorithms?
I do not actually agree with the "UnlockAndReleaseBuffer" changes
anyway. I think this obscures the code by making resource grabbing
and resource releasing code unsymmetrical, not to mention incompatible
with code branches where the unlock and the buffer release can't be
merged because other things are done in between.
As for removing the BM_TRACE code, what's broken about it? Shouldn't we
be more interested in fixing it than removing it?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-11-03 15:04:39 | Re: equal() perf tweak |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2003-11-03 14:00:34 | equal() perf tweak |