Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2017-10-02 17:30:25 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Or replace the spinlock with an LWLock?
> That'd probably be a good idea, but I'm loathe to do so in the back
> branches. Not at this callsite, but some others, there's some potential
> for contention.
If this is the only problem then I'd agree we should stick to a spinlock
(I assume the strings in question can't be very long). I was thinking
more about what to do if we find other violations that are harder to fix.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
