On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 12:55:30PM -0400, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of vie ago 03 09:59:36 -0400 2012:
> > On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 12:26:56AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > The concurrent index documentation under discussion above was never
> > > updated, so I took a stab at it, attached.
> > >
> > > Greg, I looked at adding a mention of the virtual transaction wait to
> > > the "explicit-locking" section as you suggested, and found those were
> > > all user-visible locking, while this is internal locking. I did find a
> > > clear description of transaction id locking in the pg_locks system view
> > > docs, so I just referenced that.
> >
> > I found a way to clarify the wording further; patch attached.
>
> Looks sane to me.
>
> Are we backpatching this to 9.1? I no longer remember if the original
> wording is there or just in 9.2.
I wasn't planning to, but will do as you suggest for 9.1.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
