On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 01:31:11AM -0400, Dan Ports wrote: > Yes, I suspect it can be done better. The reason it's tricky is a lock > ordering issue; part of releasing a SerializableXact has to be done > while holding SerializableXactHashLock and part has to be done without > it (because it involves taking partition locks). Reworking the order of > these things might work, but would require some careful thought since > most of the code is shared with the non-abort cleanup paths. And yes, > it's definitely the time for that.
...by which I mean it's definitely *not* the time for that, of course. Dan -- Dan R. K. Ports MIT CSAIL http://drkp.net/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
