Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Heikki Linnakangas <heikki@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>>> A much simpler approach would be to try to acquire the vacuum lock, and
>>> compact the page the usual way, and fall back to a cold update if we
>>> can't get the lock immediately.
>>
>> Seems like that could work.
> I just realized that there's a big problem with that. The process doing
> the update surely holds a pin on the buffer itself. Needs more thought..
So does VACUUM when it's trying to lock a page, no? In any case we
could surely make an extra parameter to LockBufferForCleanup if it
really needs to distinguish the cases.
regards, tom lane
