database/postgres
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/postgres/postgres.git synced 2025-11-13 16:22:44 +03:00
Code Activity

bufmgr: Use consistent naming of the clock-sweep algorithm

Browse Source 
Minor edits to comments only.

Author: Greg Burd <greg@burd.me>
Reviewed-by: Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>
Reviewed-by: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/70C6A5B5-2A20-4D0B-BC73-EB09DD62D61C@getmailspring.com
This commit is contained in:
Andres Freund
2025-09-05 12:25:59 -04:00
parent e3d5ddb7ca
commit 50e4c6ace5
5 changed files with 14 additions and 14 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
src/backend/storage/buffer/freelist.c
View File

@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ typedef struct
slock_t buffer_strategy_lock;
/*
* Clock sweep hand: index of next buffer to consider grabbing. Note that
* clock-sweep hand: index of next buffer to consider grabbing. Note that
* this isn't a concrete buffer - we only ever increase the value. So, to
* get an actual buffer, it needs to be used modulo NBuffers.
*/
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ typedef struct
* Statistics. These counters should be wide enough that they can't
* overflow during a single bgwriter cycle.
*/
uint32 completePasses; /* Complete cycles of the clock sweep */
uint32 completePasses; /* Complete cycles of the clock-sweep */
pg_atomic_uint32 numBufferAllocs; /* Buffers allocated since last reset */
/*
@@ -311,7 +311,7 @@ StrategyGetBuffer(BufferAccessStrategy strategy, uint32 *buf_state, bool *from_r
}
}
/* Nothing on the freelist, so run the "clock sweep" algorithm */
/* Nothing on the freelist, so run the "clock-sweep" algorithm */
trycounter = NBuffers;
for (;;)
{
@@ -511,7 +511,7 @@ StrategyInitialize(bool init)
StrategyControl->firstFreeBuffer = 0;
StrategyControl->lastFreeBuffer = NBuffers - 1;
/* Initialize the clock sweep pointer */
/* Initialize the clock-sweep pointer */
pg_atomic_init_u32(&StrategyControl->nextVictimBuffer, 0);
/* Clear statistics */
@@ -759,7 +759,7 @@ GetBufferFromRing(BufferAccessStrategy strategy, uint32 *buf_state)
*
* If usage_count is 0 or 1 then the buffer is fair game (we expect 1,
* since our own previous usage of the ring element would have left it
* there, but it might've been decremented by clock sweep since then). A
* there, but it might've been decremented by clock-sweep since then). A
* higher usage_count indicates someone else has touched the buffer, so we
* shouldn't re-use it.
*/