On 11/17/06,
Tom Lane <
tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
we need a special case when we are already a member of the MultiXact:
fall through without trying to reacquire the tuple lock.
Small implementation detail: Also keep a count of how many times the same session requested the same lock, and do not release the lock until he requests same number of releases.
This might add (may be significant) overhead, but I am concerned with whether it is desirable?
Comments? Should we change HeapTupleSatisfiesUpdate's API to
distinguish this case, or is it better to have a localized change
in heap_lock_tuple?
--
gurjeet[.singh]@EnterpriseDB.com
singh.gurjeet@{ gmail | hotmail | yahoo }.com