Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> > "ITAGAKI Takahiro" <itagaki.takahiro@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote
> >> AbsorbFsyncRequests will be called during the fsync loop in my patch,
> >> so new files might be added to pendingOpsTable and they will be removed
> >> from the table *before* writing the pages belonging to them.
>
> I think this fear is incorrect. At the time ForwardFsyncRequest is
> called, the backend must *already* have done whatever write it is
> concerned about fsync'ing.
Oops, I was wrong. Also, I see that there is no necessity for fearing
endless loops because hash-seqscan and HASH_ENTER don't conflict.
Attached is a revised patch. It became very simple, but I worry that
one magic number (BUFFERS_PER_ABSORB) is still left.
---
ITAGAKI Takahiro
NTT Cyber Space Laboratories