Hi, Victor! On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 at 12:47, Victor Yegorov <vyego...@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
