Teodor Sigaev <teo...@sigaev.ru> writes:
>> Anyway I now think that we might be better off with the other idea of
>> abandoning an insertion and retrying if we get a lock conflict.
> done, look at the patch.
Looks good, committed with some cosmetic adjustments.
> We definetly need new idea of locking protocol and I'll return to this
> problem at autumn (sorry, I havn't time in summer to do this
> research).
OK. I think the performance of this way will be okay, actually, in most
cases anyhow. It'll do till we have a better idea.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
