Re: Buffer locking is special (hints, checksums, AIO writes)

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Subject: Re: Buffer locking is special (hints, checksums, AIO writes)
Date: 2025-08-27 23:04:51
Message-ID: 20250827230451.a4.nmisch@google.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 03:29:02PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2025-08-27 12:14:41 -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 12:18:27PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 05:00:13PM -0400, Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > > On 2025-08-26 16:21:36 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > > > > On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 3:45 PM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > > > > > > DOES ANYBODY HAVE A BETTER NAME THAN SHARE-EXCLUSIVE???!?

> > > Which would leave us with:
> > > - reference (pins today)
> > > - share
> > > - share-exclusive
> > > - exclusive
> > > - cleanup

> > Compared to share-exclusive, I think I'd prefer a name that describes the use
> > cases, "set-hints-or-write" (or separate "write" and "set-hints" levels).

Another name idea is "self-exclusive", to contrast with "exclusive" excluding
all of (exclusive, self-exclusive, share).

Fortunately, not much code will acquire this lock type. Hence, there's
relatively little damage if the name is less obvious than older lock types or
if the name changes later.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2025-08-27 23:08:20 Re: Non-reproducible AIO failure
Previous Message Kirill Reshke 2025-08-27 21:57:02 Re: Qual push down to table AM