Re: LockDatabaseObject vs. LockSharedObject

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> I'm not sure that we have any non-relation objects that are both complex
>> enough and changeable enough for there to be an observable bug here,
>> but it seems like a risk factor going forward. It seems to me both safe
>> and reasonable to add an AcceptInvalidationMessages call in HEAD.

> My "comment refactoring" patch (already posted to the list) makes this
> change among others.

OK. I haven't read that yet, and wasn't intending to until you respond
to Alvaro's suggestions. But it might be worth committing this change
separately, since it seems to have merit independently of whether we
make those other changes.

regards, tom lane