On 21-aug-2007, at 10:55, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> It might go in if it's correct. If you have an answer to all the
> objections then there's no reason not to include it. But I must
> admit I
> didn't understand what was your answer to the above objection; care to
> rephrase?
sorry, egg on my face, testing error. the revised patch doesn't catch
the case of another backend deleting referenced tuples. I'll work on
it some more.
Lodewijk
