Re: Restructured Shared Buffer Hash Table

From: Alexandre Felipe <o(dot)alexandre(dot)felipe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Dhruv Aron <dhruv(dot)aron(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Restructured Shared Buffer Hash Table
Date: 2026-09-21 20:51:05
Message-ID: CAE8JnxNGtaKUs9ZqkcPhWcEJ1RFfGZHJOAqXiqTGQzCe5gv97g@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 4:58 PM Alexandre Felipe <
o(dot)alexandre(dot)felipe(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 4:13 PM Dhruv Aron <dhruv(dot)aron(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just logged into commitfest for the first time, perhaps that's why.
>> Can you try again?
>>
>
> Created, it will be good to see how it behaves in different environments.
>

The CFBot finished, it failed in three environments
https://github.com/postgres/postgres-cfbot/actions/runs/35622455487/job/106409000471

All during the same test (recovery/027_stream_regress) that I pointed out
above to
be the best to detect issues. Coincidence or not it passed on MacOS (the
environment
I tested locally).

Am I being naive with my hopes to make this partially lock-free?
Is there any proof that such an algorithm doesn't exist for this particular
problem?

Kind regards,
Alexandre

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bharath Rupireddy 2026-09-21 20:59:45 Re: [PATCH] Release replication slot on error in SQL-callable slot functions
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2026-09-21 20:21:03 Re: Direct TOAST v2, faster, smaller and no migration needed