Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ixRsb-0002sI-Dh for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 08:42:21 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ixRsa-00071W-0o for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 08:42:20 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ixRsZ-00071L-Kz for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 08:42:19 +0000 Received: from mail-pj1-x1043.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::1043]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ixRsX-0001CP-Co for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 08:42:18 +0000 Received: by mail-pj1-x1043.google.com with SMTP id m13so2535467pjb.2 for ; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 00:42:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=leadboat.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=+u+cGQWpD+PdfI5v+uPPNDaJI5LOSM6kH2IYlSSsy5M=; b=bxzQCswb6wkFCdsiVjLlVSkuna525xcsQmRSngNrxhGCWNg5qYC5Ltif/O7k96TSDI 7BKY2iuyQ1wuUlk9X+AF0adBi8yR/syS0Np9x81jJ9otbpsNrGmie0m99/+xX8QD4xFU F9gMAmFIBdHW6pUBvEDK7hqo3+eNyrjKwVjuU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=+u+cGQWpD+PdfI5v+uPPNDaJI5LOSM6kH2IYlSSsy5M=; b=jklpYtbv5duFOnzDzgOYZ5FqO2FjfDfGt7n58hzDmXFOgzPPmCqGE+AVaqfoTFLJ8z 3u1T/8cSDOOrGj5xt+CEzj9gWT7gi2vWp3bl9hcLa3E/PzbGJwPtwAW10jDQ8YR0H5Gg MS+EzCrdXz+IxBbiersdlZC0TVvEmbQYZFIUQkEfp72+B3dvt4NSfcUgZkcPNirl5hy7 3k99esf3Layvx4SOmAvbgubZane6jJ2XhAW9Hvr3m7lj6rvqb9TmZvAcd1nkEkWycCiM RiBCmaL3ZqmY2qXqve2TrmT+Bc+j3qKqlGksAq8f7qY+IForJjvDA7eK2W05g0bfLF07 bTSw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWQogz54UFslS8p3uq8xxu/YHgelHhEsortp+kialJifsuPNFOC MHR/2ZHY7+ZxnYZcUtdbLi4sqN83/No= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwwvgXQ5UkpYPU8h//KOh+8o4QnSHhmCuPN43KE6SrH6AIlT83XO2TAisHAj1vSzksVKtgPjg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b484:: with SMTP id y4mr8932604plr.126.1580460136347; Fri, 31 Jan 2020 00:42:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfd.leadboat.com (108-233-125-46.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [108.233.125.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u18sm9143880pgi.44.2020.01.31.00.42.15 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 31 Jan 2020 00:42:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 00:42:13 -0800 From: Noah Misch To: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com> Cc: Tom Lane , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: SimpleLruTruncate() mutual exclusion Message-ID: <20200131084213.GC3203372@rfd.leadboat.com> References: <20190218073103.GA1434723@rfd.leadboat.com> <20190628170628.GA1238361@rfd.leadboat.com> <29566.1564419497@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20190801065117.GA2355684@rfd.leadboat.com> <20191117115652.doqc77yu7kbrqwmk@localhost> <20191118061426.GA1173376@rfd.leadboat.com> <20200130153433.6gvgm723lzpgiogh@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200130153433.6gvgm723lzpgiogh@localhost> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 04:34:33PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 17, 2019 at 10:14:26PM -0800, Noah Misch wrote: > > > I'm probably missing something, so just wanted to clarify. Do I > > > understand correctly, that thread [1] and this one are independent, and > > > it is assumed in the scenario above that we're at the end of XID space, > > > but not necessarily having rounding issues? I'm a bit confused, since > > > the reproduce script does something about cutoffPage, and I'm not sure > > > if it's important or not. > > > > I think the repro recipe contained an early fix for the other thread's bug. > > While they're independent in principle, I likely never reproduced this bug > > without having a fix in place for the other thread's bug. The bug in the > > other thread was easier to hit. > > Just to clarify, since the CF item for this patch was withdrawn > recently. Does it mean that eventually the thread [1] covers this one > too? > > [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/20190202083822.GC32531%40gust.leadboat.com I withdrew $SUBJECT because, if someone reviews one of my patches, I want it to be the one you cite in [1]. I plan not to commit [1] without a Ready for Committer, and I plan not to commit $SUBJECT before committing [1]. I would be willing to commit $SUBJECT without getting a review, however.