Re: storing an explicit nonce

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Ants Aasma <ants(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Sasasu <i(at)sasa(dot)su>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: storing an explicit nonce
Date: 2021-10-12 14:46:26
Message-ID: CA+TgmoYBixcf6OK8mpf=+gLvG2TUO44XjoWykddyXPvZJAw1Mg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 10:39 AM Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> Using fake LSNs isn't new.. how is this not a concern already then?
>
> Also wondering why the buffer manager would care about the LSN on pages
> which are not BM_PERMANENT..?
>
> I'll admit that I might certainly be missing something here.

Oh, FlushBuffer has a guard against this case in it. I hadn't realized that.

Sorry for the noise.

--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2021-10-12 15:00:14 Re: [RFC] building postgres with meson
Previous Message Robert Haas 2021-10-12 14:40:54 Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname