Re: less expensive pg_buffercache on big shmem

On 02/09/16 15:19, Andres Freund wrote:

> On 2016-09-02 08:31:42 +0530, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I wonder whether we ought to just switch from the consistent method to
>> the semiconsistent method and call it good.
> +1. I think, before long, we're going to have to switch away from having
> locks & partitions in the first place. So I don't see a problem relaxing
> this. It's not like that consistency really buys you anything...  I'd
> even consider not using any locks.
>

+1 as well. When I wrote the original module I copied the design of the 
pg_locks view - as it was safe and consistent. Now it is clear that the 
ability to look at (semi-consistent) contents of the buffer cache is 
more important than having a theoretically correct point in time 
snapshot. Go for it :-)

regards

Mark