Re: [PERFORM] [HACKERS] Getting rid of AtEOXact Buffers (was Re: [Testperf-general]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If the resource owner is always responsible for releasing locked buffers, who releases the locks if the backend crashes? The semaphore "undo" I hope. Regards Gaetano Mendola ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 8: explain analyze is y

Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of AtEOXact Buffers (was Re: [Testperf-general] Re: [PERFORM] First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ...)

Seeing as I've missed the last N messages... I'll just reply to this one, rather than each of them in turn... Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 16.10.2004, 18:54:17: > I wrote: > > Josh Berkus writes: > >> First off, two test runs with OProfile are available at: > >> http://khack.osdl.org/st

Re: Re: [HACKERS] Getting rid of AtEOXact Buffers (was Re: [Testperf-general] Re: [PERFORM] First set of OSDL Shared Memscalability results, some wierdness ...)

<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If the resource owner is always responsible for releasing locked > buffers, who releases the locks if the backend crashes? The ensuing system reset takes care of that. regards, tom lane ---(end of broadcast)---