On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.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?
It solves the waiting issue, but leaves unused tuples in the heap that
previously would have been removed.
I don't think that is a solution.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services