Em seg., 30 de mar. de 2020 às 18:14, Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> escreveu:
> Hi, > > On 2020-03-30 14:10:29 -0700, Andres Freund wrote: > > On 2020-03-30 17:08:01 -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote: > > > Em seg., 30 de mar. de 2020 às 16:05, Andres Freund < > and...@anarazel.de> > > > escreveu: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On 2020-03-30 15:07:40 -0300, Ranier Vilela wrote: > > > > > I'm not sure that the patch is 100% correct. > > > > > > > > This is *NOT* correct. > > > > > > > Anyway, the original source, still wrong. > > > What is the use of testing PageIsNew (page) twice in a row, if nothing > has > > > changed. > > > > Yea, that can be reduced. It's pretty harmless though. > > > > We used to require a cleanup lock (which requires dropping the lock, > > acquiring a cleanup lock - which allows for others to make the page be > > not empty) before acting on the empty page in vacuum. That's why > > PageIsNew() had to be checked again. Well, this is what the patch does, promove reduced and continue to check PageIsNew after unlock. regards, Ranier Vilela
