Re: Should heap_update/heap_delete hold buffer locks while toasting?

Tom Lane wrote:
> The way that heap_update() and heap_delete() are currently coded, they
> hold the buffer context lock on the buffer containing the old tuple
> while they invoke heap_tuple_toast_attrs(). This strikes me as at least
> inefficient and at worst a source of deadlock. Is it possible to avoid
> holding the buffer lock while doing the TOAST manipulations?

Since the TOAST table access is doing it's own locking on the
TOAST tables, I think it'd be possible to move it outside of
the buffer lock.

Jan

--

#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com #