Re: BUFFER_LOCK_EXCLUSIVE is used in ginbuildempty().

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUFFER_LOCK_EXCLUSIVE is used in ginbuildempty().
Date: 2014-07-17 19:05:00
Message-ID: CAM3SWZTvA1bWVA+4m=edmY7q2R383gpwaKTp0QW+5mC3xAQSng@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> I don't understand the point of having these GIN_EXCLUSIVE / GIN_SHARED
> symbols. It's not like we could do anything different than
> BUFFER_LOCK_EXCLUSIVE etc instead. It there was a GinLockBuffer() it
> might make more sense to have specialized symbols, but as it is it seems
> pointless.

It's a pattern common to the index AMs. I think it's kind of pointless
myself, but as long as we're doing it we might as well be consistent.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-07-17 19:31:19 Portability issues in TAP tests
Previous Message Peter Geoghegan 2014-07-17 18:54:26 Re: Doing better at HINTing an appropriate column within errorMissingColumn()