Tom Lane escribió: > [ on further thought ] > > "Matthew T. O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> ... solving the problem > >> for analyze is a nice piece of low-hanging fruit that solves an > >> immediate problem that has been reported. > > Actually, if you wanted a low-hanging solution to that, it would > probably be to revert this 8.2 patch: > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2006-09/msg00284.php > > We did that because people were complaining of unexpected failures in > manual ANALYZEs, but perhaps the cure is worse than the disease.
How about getting ShareUpdateExclusiveLock on manual analyze and plain AccessShareLock on autovacuum-induced analyze? -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.advogato.org/person/alvherre "I must say, I am absolutely impressed with what pgsql's implementation of VALUES allows me to do. It's kind of ridiculous how much "work" goes away in my code. Too bad I can't do this at work (Oracle 8/9)." (Tom Allison) http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2007-06/msg00016.php ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
