Re: Bug: Buffer cache is not scan resistant

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "Mark Kirkwood" <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, "Pavan Deolasee" <pavan(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Gavin Sherry" <swm(at)alcove(dot)com(dot)au>, "Luke Lonergan" <llonergan(at)greenplum(dot)com>, "PGSQL Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Doug Rady" <drady(at)greenplum(dot)com>, "Sherry Moore" <sherry(dot)moore(at)sun(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Bug: Buffer cache is not scan resistant
Date: 2007-03-06 02:39:27
Message-ID: 25465.1173148767@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> What happens if VACUUM comes across buffers that *are* already in the buffer
> cache. Does it throw those on the freelist too?

Not unless they have usage_count 0, in which case they'd be subject to
recycling by the next clock sweep anyway.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gavin Sherry 2007-03-06 02:51:44 Re: [PATCHES]
Previous Message Marc G. Fournier 2007-03-06 02:32:29 Re: [PATCHES]