Re: Add pg_buffercache_mark_dirty[_all] functions to the pg_buffercache

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Aidar Imamov <a(dot)imamov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Joseph Koshakow <koshy44(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Add pg_buffercache_mark_dirty[_all] functions to the pg_buffercache
Date: 2025-11-24 05:46:29
Message-ID: aSPxNZmvhR3_haSB@paquier.xyz
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Aug 08, 2025 at 01:16:57PM +0300, Nazir Bilal Yavuz wrote:
> Thank you for looking into this! And sorry for the late reply.

Could you rebase, please? This has not applied for some time, but
I've made the situation worse with 4b203d499c61. No need to bump
again the module for this release cycle, we can stay at 1.7 for the
new objects.
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Kapila 2025-11-24 05:49:23 Re: How can end users know the cause of LR slot sync delays?
Previous Message Michael Paquier 2025-11-24 05:35:32 Re: Add os_page_num to pg_buffercache