Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vNdk1-009dMk-2E for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 21:04:57 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vNdk0-004Om6-10 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 21:04:56 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vNdk0-004Olx-03 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 21:04:56 +0000 Received: from mail-ed1-x52f.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::52f]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1vNdjy-001IXp-0j for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 21:04:55 +0000 Received: by mail-ed1-x52f.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-63c489f1e6cso880871a12.1 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 13:04:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1764018292; x=1764623092; darn=postgresql.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=B3uvSIgmprKV7cyDNdX4Mv5hjKAMyJNMjnpK5A54m3A=; b=exddX1Cc73XdGfelFXFdfo+PEn0NDfaZasyhIpv8+vc2QQ5IxsJ328eeTiQHxHDtA9 57CQtiuuEQKUPEuQp5oVx9vReoGMkw1tlLhqwAQARcpHPZd1nn+lTkVby+ZyiIoEfzcL FXlE4C8w+4RMFqF7n1qk4azTCVrlXIGTcd40S0pzpl7BCVB2vfgXgjE2sZAmeq7US4F4 Z2XpIwHXxqgzGK6kaOebMg2FJyWCkQnwzbs43f23oPqPi08J/mzV7n03nXuosvt+RRaj V5WMAa/76dju140KdDj4lDqXiKwzAVQy04E2OWvt6ES15/xcUIOu0QEzQ31tS3U5lsS9 ncUQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1764018292; x=1764623092; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=B3uvSIgmprKV7cyDNdX4Mv5hjKAMyJNMjnpK5A54m3A=; b=jEXqMLIigJTcUklG8beJcmo+vwyu18rqItUPmP6iDGmhnawB1sodaQQPZbQuGz044+ lEp45zQ11Q9NOkKOXeuVQxb+NJOZd2r+LMFHkBpvOgunJ0pUxuZ81hM63jp3bROW+jY5 JCJDMlVXgtUinG2J4jBSEcF22vG8HJW3ODY9naw5Gk3JeOJCOEWARfcD5kenmYRS8vxr EyhncBI6bBpgFuWjtB7Z0wBXHLOyAs+Miv93u5gcMyz6nayS/8xX41OiEfeyzKhVykej BWgNq7yUVh7mT0KSqLR2HiHiE/wWzfOiYZMmKNm3s33Le3MS2LLrHnzyT3cQ9FH5M82/ 6j0g== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCV+/c1Y9ZZ4C5gcYHsWlvvdEoBff2iGEL/hMdTy/madVfgwyktWhOmja9Qm+r0U2DOk4Vg6b+BfwIbw9FpK@postgresql.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yzl9H3zLJ1b08P8XOWfl3OkrkWD+Rl7osK5lEuryUNyStY9BWs4 yk2rrA4pLlNVZKNtxmGpn/gWCynHjjvfuUdWWLJucPmMqBiJPnUvvQrnlVyEpL1Uw2nws3xvvXk jq5OxaguN6D/0hNKlW3hO0Gc5J6Cy3sg= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvK5mpwmoT1x7x9G4hL5UG9VGAyYccTKmFA7B63wvFkTuJjt29VoWXV4J74nXW vOeIpBY4dr+B6zOKhl8wZOGsmjroKGjOBrIHjdKsTNjvC55lHLb+h8hczrBd12xEpMwzFxYLqUI /LMAeUxyDGBU+kTg3xItaY1CT2AnF7JrN8bj4cIRc21vIiAiTLVUvCHVhbuei6XsDz50fdtpzl/ qOaKSD/ZeOTWf9OBGNw41EgxB+pvVTmtW5z5crnlDRf7AX+cM0j5NrWUslBIQPd0CSA9Y7t X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG7C0czjrA8AxI2r8U1jOKbACXUWntv8U5y6qO2tEj5q7DPAZ1kCkjt086kwIHAc6CBUa63hz5lWInBEQtJIGw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:26d0:b0:634:11d7:f70c with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-6455507834bmr13084846a12.2.1764018292318; Mon, 24 Nov 2025 13:04:52 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <6kmid26do57ykqfpvq6iieniy4djsymhrypkjccazq5g4bbe6a@2y6owwv7qpex> <3je3ahgf7rrmmurxo6hnlhg5d3ffwfrtjwjxd6jm5srlv5iebp@vxqk5qtgmowr> <3w7v3w6a57jnssokap4k7thoekig72flnyhd4wp3yftzdd7lm7@f6lpcfen6hr7> <6rgb2nvhyvnszz4ul3wfzlf5rheb2kkwrglthnna7qhe24onwr@vw27225tkyar> In-Reply-To: From: Melanie Plageman Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 16:04:41 -0500 X-Gm-Features: AWmQ_bmJMTzX0aPAOHhz4fKM8tEMzR4K-ShLWjObA-MXnL3z1tx-CX3Eq6pJ3gE Message-ID: Subject: Re: Buffer locking is special (hints, checksums, AIO writes) To: Andres Freund Cc: Matthias van de Meent , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Thomas Munro , Heikki Linnakangas , Noah Misch , Robert Haas , Michael Paquier Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 3:58=E2=80=AFPM Andres Freund = wrote: > > 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 cu= rrently > > effectively harmless. > > Does anybody have opinions about whether to backpatch this fix? Given tha= t it > has no real consequences I'm mildly inclined not to, but maybe there are = cases > where the additional wait list lock cycle matters? Since it is a mistake, I am mildly in favor of backporting to avoid confusion for future developers. It's pretty weird that LWLockWakeup() has to be called again to actually unset LW_FLAG_HAS_WAITERS. But since it's not really harmful, this is a very mild opinion. - Melanie