Re: tuple concurrently updated

From: Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Kangmo, Kim" <ilvsusie(at)hanafos(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: tuple concurrently updated
Date: 2002-07-28 16:39:09
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.4.44.0207290138260.28234-100000@angelic.cynic.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, 28 Jul 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

> Other than the fact that the second CREATE INDEX fails and rolls back,
> there's no problem ;-)

Agh!

So what, in the current version of postgres, are my options for
doing parallel index builds?

cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-07-28 16:58:09 Re: Question about LWLockAcquire's use of semaphores instead of spinlocks
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-07-28 16:32:36 Re: tuple concurrently updated