"Mikheev, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Yeah, I suppose. We already do record locking of all the fixed
>> spinlocks (BufMgrLock etc), it's just the per-buffer spinlocks that
>> are missing from that (and CRIT_SECTION calls). Would it be
>> reasonable to assume that only one buffer spinlock could be held
>> at a time?
> No. UPDATE holds two spins, btree split even more.
> But stop - afair bufmgr remembers locked buffers, probably
> we could just add XXX_CRIT_SECTION to LockBuffer..?
Right. A buffer lock isn't a spinlock, ie, we don't hold the spinlock
except within LockBuffer. So a quick CRIT_SECTION should deal with
that. Actually, with careful placement of CRIT_SECTION calls in
LockBuffer, there's no need to record holding the buffer's cntxt
spinlock at all, I think. Will work on it.
regards, tom lane
