| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Poorly thought out code in vacuum |
| Date: | 2012-01-06 14:29:39 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYeYaZfa-oKqpu9Y=+vSdQf=kCcRxq-M30JPX4w+vkSpw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I suppose Robert had something more intelligent in mind than a tight
> loop when the buffer can't be exclusively locked, so maybe there is
> some other change that should be made here instead.
My intention was to skip the tuple, but I failed to notice the unusual
way in which this loop iterates. How about something like the
attached?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| fix-vacuum-loop.patch | application/octet-stream | 622 bytes |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2012-01-06 14:53:33 | Re: Poorly thought out code in vacuum |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2012-01-06 13:34:30 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Fix breakage from earlier plperl fix. |