Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: > Hello, > > As far as I see gin seems using GIN_EXCLUSIVE instead of > BUFFER_LOCK_EXCLUSIVE for LockBuffer, but the raw > BUFFER_LOCK_EXCLUSIVE appears in ginbuildempty(). > > Does it has a meaning to fix them to GIN_EXCLUSIVE?
I don't understand the point of having these GIN_EXCLUSIVE / GIN_SHARED symbols. It's not like we could do anything different than BUFFER_LOCK_EXCLUSIVE etc instead. It there was a GinLockBuffer() it might make more sense to have specialized symbols, but as it is it seems pointless. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
