RE: Re: Buffer access rules, and a probable bug

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mikheev, Vadim [mailto:vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM]
>
> > On further thought, btbuild is not that badly broken at the moment,
> > because CREATE INDEX acquires ShareLock on the relation, so
> > there can be no concurrent writers at the page level. Still, it
> > seems like it'd be a good idea to do "LockBuffer(buffer,
> BUFFER_LOCK_SHARE)"
> > here, and probably also to invoke HeapTupleSatisfiesNow() via the
> > HeapTupleSatisfies() macro so that infomask update is checked for.
> > Vadim, what do you think?
>
> Looks like there is no drawback in locking buffer so let's lock it.
>

OK I would fix it.
As for HeapTupleSatisfies() there seems to be another choise to
let HeapTupleSatisfiesAny() be equivalent to HeapTupleSatisfiesNow()
other than always returning true.

Comments ?

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue