> I'm rerunning to see if it is intermittent. Second run -- no 
> error.  Running a third time......no error.  Now I'm confused.
>  What would cause such an error, Tom? I'm going to check on my

Hmm, concurrent checkpoint? Probably we could simplify dirty test
in ByfferSync() - ie test bufHdr->cntxDirty without holding
shlock (and pin!) on buffer: should be good as long as we set
cntxDirty flag *before* XLogInsert in access methods. Have to
look more...

Vadim

Tue, 20 Mar 2001 15:25:24 -0800
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>
RE: Beta 6 Regression results on Redat 7.0.
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM> writes:
> Hmm, concurrent checkpoint? Probably we could simplify dirty test
> in ByfferSync() - ie test bufHdr->cntxDirty without holding
> shlock (and pin!) on buffer: should be good as long as we set
> cntxDirty flag *before* XLogInsert in access methods. Have to
> look more...

Yes, I'm wondering if some other backend is trying to write/flush
the buffer (maybe as part of a checkpoint, maybe not).  But seems
like we should have seen this before, if so; that's not a low-
probability scenario, particularly with just 64 buffers...

			regards, tom lane

Tue, 20 Mar 2001 18:44:02 -0500
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Beta 6 Regression results on Redat 7.0. 