ncm(at)zembu(dot)com (Nathan Myers) writes:
> Here, backend B is a good citizen and locks while it makes its change.

No, backend B wasn't a good citizen: it should have been holding
exclusive lock on the buffer.

> Also, as hints, would it be Bad(tm) if an attempt to clear one failed?

Clearing hint bits is also an exclusive-lock-only operation.  Notice
I specified that *setting* them is the only case allowed to be done
with shared lock.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

• Re: Buffer access rules, and a probable bug at 2001-07-03 22:59:34 from Nathan Myers

Responses

• Re: Buffer access rules, and a probable bug at 2001-07-10 20:21:02 from Bill Studenmund

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB	Date: 2001-07-04 08:37:57
	Subject: AW: Re: Backup and Recovery
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2001-07-04 03:16:24
	Subject: Re: stuck spin lock with many concurrent users