From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Julien Rouhaud <rjuju123@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Update outdated references to SLRU ControlLock
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 14:05:56 +0900
Message-ID: <aLUptKkboud-OZAw@paquier.xyz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aLUT2UO8RjJOzZNq@jrouhaud>
References: <aLUT2UO8RjJOzZNq@jrouhaud>
On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 11:32:41AM +0800, Julien Rouhaud wrote:
> Note that the main comment of slru.c still has one paragraph that mentions
> "bank control lock" consistently before switching to just "control lock" in the
> next paragraph. I'm assuming that it's ok in that context as it seems clear to
> me that those are the same thing, just spelled with a less verbose name.
Good catch, right.
I am not seeing "control" used much as a term (3 times on HEAD).
There is a lot of "bank lock" or "SLRU bank lock", both being mixed
depending on the parts of the code using SLRUs (multixact, predicates,
etc.).
"SLRU bank lock" speaks a bit better to me, as the concept relates
to.. SLRUs, but that's mostly a matter of taste between the three
wordings, I guess. Do you have a preference?
Not saying that one is better than the other as they're all used, just
noticed the difference in the comments, with all the terms referring
to the same thing.
--
Michael
Attachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 832B) download
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: michael@paquier.xyz, rjuju123@gmail.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Update outdated references to SLRU ControlLock
In-Reply-To: <aLUptKkboud-OZAw@paquier.xyz>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox