Re: lazy vacuum and AccessExclusiveLock

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> An alternative solution would be to lower the vacuum delay settings before
> starting the truncating phase, but this doesn't work very well in autovacuum
> due to the autobalancing code (which can cause other processes to change our
> cost delay settings).  This case could be considered in the balancing code, but
> it is simpler this way.

I don't think autovacuum has a problem --- if someone requests a
conflicting lock, autovac will get kicked off, no?  The OP's problem
comes from doing a manual vacuum.  Perhaps "don't do that" is a good
enough answer.

            regards, tom lane