I wrote this patch for my system, and it works fine. However, it's a really ugly workaround. I can publish the source if anybody is interested.
Am Montag, 26. August 2002 06:33 schrieb Thomas O'Dowd: > Thanks for your feedback Stephan. Seems like a tough fix. Pitty it won't > make it into 7.3. I presume there are other folk out there suffering > from the same problems that I'm having. What approaches if any have > people taken to work around this problem? I read in the list that one > user patched his postmaster to explictly ignore the RI "FOR UPDATE" on > tables he knew weren't changing. Can't find the detailed message in the > archives right now, but I read it earlier. Any other work-arounds? > > Tom. > > On Mon, 2002-08-26 at 12:46, Stephan Szabo wrote: > > > My question is if this is now resolved for 7.3? I'm trying to figure > > > out what I can do with my 7.2.1 problems... Has anyone got a > > > back-ported patch, perhaps against 7.2.2? > > > > It's actually not resolved because my attempts at the lower strength lock > > opened up holes and fixing those opened up new deadlock situations, and > > I ran out of time in the 7.3 cycle to try to make it work. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
