Further corrections from the department of redundancy department.

Thom Brown
This commit is contained in:
Robert Haas 2012-05-02 11:11:25 -04:00
parent e01e66f808
commit 1b4998fd44
3 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions

View file

@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ we get a disk layout like this:
where the numbers are page numbers *at that level*, starting from 0.
To find the physical block # corresponding to leaf page n, we need to
count the number number of leaf and upper-level pages preceding page n.
count the number of leaf and upper-level pages preceding page n.
This turns out to be
y = n + (n / F + 1) + (n / F^2 + 1) + ... + 1

View file

@ -1009,7 +1009,7 @@ LogAccessExclusiveLockPrepare(void)
* RecordTransactionAbort() do not optimise away the transaction
* completion record which recovery relies upon to release locks. It's a
* hack, but for a corner case not worth adding code for into the main
* commit path. Second, must must assign an xid before the lock is
* commit path. Second, we must assign an xid before the lock is
* recorded in shared memory, otherwise a concurrently executing
* GetRunningTransactionLocks() might see a lock associated with an
* InvalidTransactionId which we later assert cannot happen.

View file

@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ And the reader can do this:
On machines with strong memory ordering, these weaker barriers will simply
prevent compiler rearrangement, without emitting any actual machine code.
On machines with weak memory ordering, they will will prevent compiler
On machines with weak memory ordering, they will prevent compiler
reordering and also emit whatever hardware barrier may be required. Even
on machines with weak memory ordering, a read or write barrier may be able
to use a less expensive instruction than a full barrier.