On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 12:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
We could probably fix this specific issue by refactoring things in such
a way that the seqscan start point is frozen on the first read and
re-used after rewinds.
I don't know what you mean by frozen exactly, but the start point of a
On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 10:51 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 12:07 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
We could probably fix this specific issue by refactoring things in such
a way that the seqscan start point is frozen on the first read and
re-used after rewinds.
I don't know what you
Jeff Davis pg...@j-davis.com writes:
On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 10:51 -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:
I don't know what you mean by frozen exactly, but the start point of a
synchronized scan is stored in shared memory; otherwise, it wouldn't
know where to stop.
Correction: I didn't actually mean
