Tom Lane wrote:
> Jan Wieck <wieck@hub.org> writes:
> > TOAST
> > WARNING: This is actually broken - we have self-deadlocks
> > due to concurrent changes in buffer management.
> > Vadim and me are working on it.
>
> Uh, exactly how broken would that be? Do you mean that the CVS tip
> is now nonfunctional and no one else can expect to get any useful
> work done? Or do the problems only arise in special cases?
My usual sequence is
- construct a patch - run "cvs update" - apply my patch to a local copy of the CVS tree - run the
regressiontest - apply my patch to the checked out tree - cvs commit
That avoids alot of trouble. The problems only arise if someone uses a new command to activate tuple move
offto the secondary relation.
I had some time where I wasn't able to compile the current CVS at all (my old, years grown, box got screwed up
alittle, and my new notebook wasn't installed to a useful level). The problem now is, that if the toaster really
moved off values into the secondary relation, the backend locks up when trying to append a main tuple.
Vadim changed something recently in heap_insert() and I already gave him a call. He'll look at the test case
Iposted to CORE soon.
Jan
--
#======================================================================#
# It's easier to get forgiveness for being wrong than for being right. #
# Let's break this rule - forgive me. #
#================================================== JanWieck@Yahoo.com #
