| From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Fix incorrect buffer lock description in pg_visibility comment |
| Date: | 2026-01-05 18:41:15 |
| Message-ID: | CAD21AoAYEBE70xjoJ8cydsQ2Xx6VLJeDnqyePVtqoB6WES9tUw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 29, 2025 at 10:33 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 6:18 PM Chao Li <li(dot)evan(dot)chao(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Hackers,
> >
> > While reviewing the patch [1], though I couldn’t raise a comment for it, I noticed a comment error in the file pg_visibility.c, where a buffer lock is held in shared mode but the code comment mentioned exclusive mode. I am filing a small patch to correct the comment.
> >
> > I only changed "exclusively" to "shared", the format changed was done by pgindent.
>
> Yeah, it seems like a typo since the first commit of pg_visiblity,
> e472ce9624e0. I think we can backpatch it to all supported versions.
>
I find that "shared locked" sounds unnatural to me. How about
rephrasing to "... we're holding the buffer locked in shared mode"?
I've attached the patch.
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| 0001-pg_visibility-Fix-incorrect-buffer-lock-description.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2026-01-05 18:47:01 | Re: Newly created replication slot may be invalidated by checkpoint |
| Previous Message | Jacob Champion | 2026-01-05 18:37:45 | Re: Make PGOAUTHCAFILE in libpq-oauth work out of debug mode |