docs: correct reserved-write methods to not claim direct disk writes#372
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Kerollmops
approved these changes
May 21, 2026
Kerollmops
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you very much for your help. Merging 👌
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #367. The
put_reserved,put_reserved_with_flags,get_or_put_reserved, andget_or_put_reserved_with_flagsdocs claimed the value "can directly be written to disk", which @Kerollmops noted is wrong: the reserved pointer only refers to the memory map (so "directly to disk") withMDB_WRITEMAP, otherwise it points to an in-memory page, and the real benefit is reducing copies. The doc comments now state that the value is written into LMDB-reserved space to avoid an extra copy, with theMDB_WRITEMAPcaveat. Doctests for all four methods pass.