| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Matthias van de Meent <boekewurm+postgres(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Buffer locking is special (hints, checksums, AIO writes) |
| Date: | 2025-11-24 20:57:59 |
| Message-ID: | hqbph6smbatxi6fcixjnzremjbt5m4ks2ma35ktrqgrzdffnbi@x7cgu5ses6jm |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2025-11-19 21:47:49 -0500, Andres Freund wrote:
> 0001: A straight-up bugfix in lwlock.c - albeit for a bug that seems currently
> effectively harmless.
Does anybody have opinions about whether to backpatch this fix? Given that it
has no real consequences I'm mildly inclined not to, but maybe there are cases
where the additional wait list lock cycle matters?
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2025-11-24 21:02:15 | Re: Patch: dumping tables data in multiple chunks in pg_dump |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2025-11-24 20:55:25 | Re: should we have a fast-path planning for OLTP starjoins? |