Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> You are correct. We need to lock Proc stuctures during our scan, but we
> don't need to keep the list in shared memory. No reason to do it. Do
> we have to keep the Proc's locked while we get our table data locks. I
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
No! Only while we are scanning Procs...
> sure hope not. Not sure how we are going prevent someone from
> committing their transaction between our Proc scan and when we start our
> transaction. Not even sure if I should be worried about that.
We shouldn't... It doesn't matter.
Vadim
