On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 3:25 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:
> Alexander Korotkov wrote: > > > And what happen if somebody concurrently set (fastupdate = on)? > > Can we miss conflicts because of that? > > I think it'd be better to have that option require AccessExclusive lock, > so that it can never be changed concurrently with readers. Seems to me > that penalizing every single read to cope with this case would be a bad > trade-off. As Andrey Borodin mentioned, we already do. Sorry for buzz :) ------ Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
