On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:47 AM, Bossart, Nathan <bossa...@amazon.com> wrote: > On 9/24/17, 10:12 PM, "Michael Paquier" <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Attached is a proposal of patch. > > The patch seems reasonable to me, and I haven't encountered any issues in > my tests, even after applying the vacuum-multiple-relations patch on top > of it.
Thanks for the review, Nathan! > + * Take a lock here for the relation lookup. If ANALYZE or > VACUUM spawn > + * multiple transactions, the lock taken here will be gone > once the > + * current transaction running commits, which could cause the > relation > + * to be gone, or the RangeVar might not refer to the OID > looked up here. > > I think this could be slightly misleading. Perhaps it would be more > accurate to say that the lock will be gone any time vacuum() creates a new > transaction (either in vacuum_rel() or when use_own_xacts is true). The comment of the proposed patch matches as much as possible what is currently on HEAD, so I would still go with something close to that. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
