Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)krosing(dot)net>
Cc: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>, Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, jwbaker(at)acm(dot)org
Subject: Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem
Date: 2002-01-07 02:32:39
Message-ID: 288.1010370759@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-odbc

Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)krosing(dot)net> writes:
> I misinterpreted the fact that new VACUUM will skip locked pages

Huh? There is no such "fact".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-01-07 03:11:35 Re: Spinning verses sleeping in s_lock
Previous Message Sean Chittenden 2002-01-07 02:11:02 Re: pgcryto strangeness...

Browse pgsql-odbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2002-01-07 07:01:15 Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-01-07 01:37:05 Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem