On 2013-11-25 18:06:30 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > I mean that in the !KEYS_UPDATED case we don't need to abort if we're > > only acquiring a key share... > > Hm, I think that's correct -- we don't need to abort. But we still need > to wait until the updater completes. So this proposed patch is not the > full story.
Hm. Why do we need to wait in that case? Isn't the entire point of KEY SHARE locks *not* having to wait for !KEYS_UPDATED? ISTM in that case we should only check whether the creating transaction has aborted because in that case we don't need to take out a lock? Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund 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