On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 03:01:53PM -0500, Sami Imseih wrote: > I kept the local array to serve consecutive reads and to avoid having to > take a shared lock on shared memory every time GetLWTrancheName is > called. A new LWLock to protect this array is required.
I'm not seeing why we need this cache anymore. This is an append-only list, so we could instead keep a backend-local copy of LWLockCounter that gets updated as needed. As long as the ID is less than our backend-local counter, we can go straight to the shared array. If it is greater, we'll have to first update our counter, which should be rare and inexpensive. -- nathan
