Hi Karina Liskevich > + /* > + * There is no need to hold entry->mutex when reading stats_since and > + * minmax_stats_since for (unlike counters) they are always written > + * while holding pgss->lock exclusively. We are holding pgss->lock > + * shared so there should be no race here. > + */ > stats_since = entry->stats_since; > minmax_stats_since = entry->minmax_stats_since; > - SpinLockRelease(&entry->mutex);
>> The comment could be simpler, say a "The spinlock is not required when >> reading these two as they are always updated when holding pgss->lock >> exclusively.". Or something like that. Agree , It reduces the lock time , The new comment are short and concise, It sounds good . Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> 于2024年11月8日周五 14:08写道： > On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 04:08:30PM +0300, Karina Litskevich wrote: > > Thank you for your feedback and the shorter wording of the comment. > > I used it in the new version of the patch. > > After a second look, sounds good to me. Let's wait a bit and see of > others have comments or thoughts to share. > -- > Michael >
