Dan Ports <d...@csail.mit.edu> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 01:30:27PM -0400, Dan Ports wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 09, 2011 at 07:06:18AM -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote: >>> Sounds reasonable, but why did you pass the snapshot to the >>> PredicateLockPage() call but not the PredicateLockRelation() >>> call? Oversight? >> >> Yep, just an oversight; long day yesterday. I'll fix the patch >> shortly > > Attached. Only change is the missing snapshot argument to that one > call. I am in full agreement with this patch. It's an interesting coincidence that the two predicate locking calls which were at the wrong level to have access to the snapshot information were also at the wrong level to be able to fire them at only the needed times. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
