On 18 Jun 2001 18:04:14 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Christopher Smith <x@xman.org> writes:
> >> Um ... surely that should be "if count > 0" ? Or was that just a
> >> transcription error?
> >>
> >> This approach certainly ought to work as desired given the exclusive
> >> lock, so a silly typo seems like a plausible explanation...
>
> > Sorry, it is indeed a transcription error (sadly).
>
> Oh well. The next thought, given that you mention threads, is that
> you've got multiple threads issuing commands to the same backend
> connection; in which case the interlocking you think you have doesn't
> exist at all...
You got it bang on... I thought I had isolated access to the connections
properly, but shortly after posting that last e-mail, had a eureka moment.
I presume this will make the bug go away, so I'll encourage everyone to
ignore this thread (other than as a warning ;-) until I've confirmed I
still have the problem after making the correct adjustments.
--Chris
