Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2025-01-19 09:37:54 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> Removal sounds good to me. Any objections from anybody?
>> Andres, perhaps you have some experience using that and would prefer
>> keep them and make them work?
> I think they're pretty useless, tbh. There's too many buffers that just
> printing them out is helpful - pg_buffercache is going to be a better
> bet. When debugging issues where pg_buffercache isn't an option (e.g. because
> it's a hang that doesn't allow running pg_buffercache), using
> DebugPrintBufferRefcount() is much more targeted.
Sounds like we're in agreement. I'll push Jacob's second patch.
regards, tom lane
