On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 12:33 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 2:52 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Amit Kapila <amit.kapil...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>> Amit, can you please split the buffer manager changes in this patch >>>> into a separate patch? >>> >>> Sure, attached patch extend_bufmgr_api_for_hash_index_v1.patch does that. >> >> The additional argument to ConditionalLockBuffer() doesn't seem to be >> used anywhere in the main patch. Do we actually need it? >> > > No, with latest patch of concurrent hash index, we don't need it. I > have forgot to remove it. Please find updated patch attached. The > usage of second parameter for ConditionalLockBuffer() is removed as we > don't want to allow I/O across content locks, so the patch is changed > to fallback to twice locking the metapage.
Committed. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
