Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full)

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full)
Date: 2011-03-29 00:07:18
Message-ID: 2550.1301357238@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> writes:
> I somehow fail to see how this complete reversal of who does what and 
> affecting code in entirely different parts of the system will qualify 
> for patching back releases.

I don't think any of the proposals make sense for back-patching.  We
should be considering what's the sanest way to fix this in 9.2.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Jan WieckDate: 2011-03-29 00:48:03
Subject: Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full)
Previous:From: Jan WieckDate: 2011-03-28 23:55:57
Subject: Re: BUG #5946: Long exclusive lock taken by vacuum (not full)

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group