On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I suppose Robert had something more intelligent in mind than a tight >> loop when the buffer can't be exclusively locked, so maybe there is >> some other change that should be made here instead. > > My intention was to skip the tuple, but I failed to notice the unusual > way in which this loop iterates. How about something like the > attached?
It solves the waiting issue, but leaves unused tuples in the heap that previously would have been removed. I don't think that is a solution. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
