Gregory Stark wrote:
> Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The reason the patch is so short is that it's a kluge.  If we really
> > cared about supporting this case, more wide-ranging changes would be
> > needed (eg, there's no need to eat maintenance_work_mem worth of RAM
> > for the dead-TIDs array); and a decent respect to the opinions of
> > mankind would require some attention to updating the header comments
> > and function descriptions, too.
> The only part that seems klugy to me is how it releases the lock and
> reacquires it rather than wait in the first place until it can acquire the
> lock. Fixed that and changed lazy_space_alloc to allocate only as much space
> as is really necessary.
> Gosh, I've never been accused of offending all mankind before.

Does that feel good or bad?

I won't comment on the spirit of the patch but I'll observe that you
should respect mankind a little more by observing brace position in
if/else ;-)

Alvaro Herrera                      
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
       choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not

Reply via email to