>> Sorry, I'm not real familiar with pgpool, but have you thought about >> using an advisory lock on the target table, instead of a "real" lock >> (SELECT ... FOR UPDATE / LOCK table)? An advisory lock should not >> interfere with autovacuum. Obviously, this would only work if all the >> INSERTs in your example were coming from a single application (i.e. >> pgpool) which would honor the advisory lock. > > Problem with the advisory lock is, it will not work if the target > table is empty.
Oops. I was wrong. the key for advisory lock needs to be a unique value, but not necessarily a row value in a table. Seems this is the way I should go(though need to be carefull since the lock is not released even after a transaction ends). Thanks! -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
