Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> A much simpler approach would be to try to acquire the vacuum lock, and 
>>> compact the page the usual way, and fall back to a cold update if we 
>>> can't get the lock immediately.
>> Seems like that could work.

> I just realized that there's a big problem with that. The process doing 
> the update surely holds a pin on the buffer itself. Needs more thought..

So does VACUUM when it's trying to lock a page, no?  In any case we
could surely make an extra parameter to LockBufferForCleanup if it
really needs to distinguish the cases.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?


Reply via email to