Re: Get rid of WALBufMappingLock
Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>
From: Pavel Borisov <pashkin.elfe@gmail.com>
To: Victor Yegorov <vyegorov@gmail.com>
Cc: Yura Sokolov <y.sokolov@postgrespro.ru>,
Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>, "pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Date: 2025-02-17T09:20:09Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Hi, Victor! On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 at 12:47, Victor Yegorov <vyegorov@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hey. > > I find “Get rid of WALBufMappingLock" commit message misleading, 'cos Lock it's being replaced by CV, actually. > > Should the subject be changed to “Replace WALBufMappingLock with ConditionVariable” instead? The patch replaces WALBufMappingLock with a lockless algorithm based on atomic variables and CV. Mentioning only CV in the head is only a part of implementation. Also, the header should better reflect what is done on the whole, than the implementation details. So I'd rather see a header like "Replace WALBufMappingLock by lockless algorithm" or "Initialize WAL buffers concurrently without using WALBufMappingLock" or something like that. Kind regards, Pavel Borisov Supabase