Re: introduce bufmgr hooks

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: introduce bufmgr hooks
Date: 2022-09-02 22:26:06
Message-ID: 20220902222606.GA1262144@nathanxps13
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 05:34:03PM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2022-09-01 13:11:50 -0700, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 08:29:31AM -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
>> > I also think it'll
>> > make it harder to improve things in this area, which needs quite a bit of
>> > work.
>> If you have specific refactoring in mind that you think ought to be a
>> prerequisite for this change, I'm happy to give it a try.
> There's a few semi-active threads (e.g. about not holding multiple buffer
> partition locks). One important change is to split the way we acquire buffers
> for file extensions - right now we get a victim buffer while holding the
> relation extension lock, because there's simply no API to do otherwise. We
> need to change that so we get acquire a victim buffer before holding the
> extension lock (with the buffer pinned but not [tag] valid), then we need to
> get the extension lock, insert it into its new position in the buffer mapping
> table.

I see, thanks for clarifying.

Nathan Bossart
Amazon Web Services:

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2022-09-02 22:43:35 win_flex.exe (and likely win_bison.exe) isn't concurrency safe
Previous Message Justin Pryzby 2022-09-02 22:24:58 Re: warn if GUC set to an invalid shared library