Re: reducing the overhead of frequent table locks - now, with WIP patch

On 6/7/11 1:11 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> that appear low risk.  I seriously doubt that I would consider *any*
>> > meaningful change in the locking area to be low risk.
> That's a shame. We'll fix it in 9.2 then.

I will point out that we bounced Alvaro's FK patch, which *was*
submitted in time for CF4, because of unknown locking impact.

-- 
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://pgexperts.com