Message-ID: <57c59f08bbb92875251dc97dbc47600fa237712c.camel@j-davis.com>
Subject: Re: Is this a problem in GenericXLogFinish()?
From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 12:05:00 -0700
In-Reply-To: <6d23aff2-7151-65b1-528b-2189ffa6e2df@iki.fi>
References: <d2c31606e6bb9b83a02ed4835d65191b38d4ba12.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <25104133-7df8-cae3-b9a2-1c0aaa1c094a@iki.fi>
	 <399492009193fa2c37a61b630e4449546a550039.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <c84114f8-c7f1-5b57-f85a-3adc31e1a904@iki.fi>
	 <146426fc662f88604c700a72a3833b1919922f9e.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <CA+TgmobvdZMWj5=fextXP_Q81eS9g0sbVbVE4qiKAtJs8dMjyA@mail.gmail.com>
	 <08b4f1f7dcf321d38373f06acc65a8d62cc2f017.camel@j-davis.com>
	 <CA+TgmoZ24f5eNNJFV6chv+xjCOOy9-uZqwPwrWVvQMZfHUsMxQ@mail.gmail.com>
	 <6d23aff2-7151-65b1-528b-2189ffa6e2df@iki.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.4-0ubuntu2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/57c59f08bbb92875251dc97dbc47600fa237712c.camel%40j-davis.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 2023-09-27 at 18:57 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> We could define a new REGBUF_NO_CHANGE flag to signal that the buffer
> is=20
> registered just for locking purposes, and not actually modified by
> the=20
> WAL record.

Out of curiosity I also added a trial assert (not intending to actually
add this):

  Assert(!(flags & REGBUF_NO_CHANGE) || !BufferIsExclusiveLocked());

I expected that to fail, but it didn't -- perhaps that buffer is only
locked during replay or something? I don't think we want that specific
Assert; I was just experimenting with some cross-checks we could do to
verify that REGBUF_NO_CHANGE is used properly.

Also, I ran into some problems with GIN that might require a bit more
refactoring in ginPlaceToPage(). Perhaps we could consider
REGBUF_NO_CHANGE a general bypass of the Assert(BufferIsDirty()), and
use it temporarily until we have a chance to analyze/refactor each of
the callers that need it.

Regards,
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Jeff Davis