"=?iso-8859-2?B?U1rbQ1MgR+Fib3I=?=" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Q1. So is this everything that can be said -- NOTIFY calls
> simple_heap_update that is concurrently updated by a different transaction?
If that's what it is, then there's still a question: why? The notify
code has enough locking that this failure shouldn't happen. If you can
reproduce this I'd like to look into it.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
