From: | Masahiko Sawada <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Fix pg_buffercache document |
Date: | 2020-05-08 05:28:01 |
Message-ID: | CA+fd4k5Qb7D5Kn5COgvmHd4PPUZGnVMZq9dkDArigW6WR6uSAA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 8 May 2020 at 13:36, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 4:02 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 2:53 PM Masahiko Sawada
> > <masahiko(dot)sawada(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > There is a typo in the patch (queris/queries). How about if slightly
> > > > reword it as "Since buffer manager locks are not taken to copy the
> > > > buffer state data that the view will display, accessing
> > > > <structname>pg_buffercache</structname> view has less impact on normal
> > > > buffer activity but it doesn't provide a consistent set of results
> > > > across all buffers. However, we ensure that the information of each
> > > > buffer is self-consistent."?
> > >
> > > Thank you for your idea. Agreed.
> > >
> > > Attached the updated version patch.
> > >
> >
> > LGTM. I will commit this tomorrow unless there are more comments.
> >
>
> Pushed.
>
Thank you!
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kyotaro Horiguchi | 2020-05-08 06:03:26 | Re: Logical replication subscription owner |
Previous Message | Fujii Masao | 2020-05-08 05:23:32 | Re: Back-patch is necessary? Re: Don't try fetching future segment of a TLI. |