On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 10:57 AM Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> wrote:
>
> As far as I can tell 72e78d831a as-is is just bogus. Unfortunately that likely
> also means 3ba59ccc89 is not right.
>
Indeed. I was thinking of a fix but couldn't find one yet. One idea I
am considering is to allow catalog table locks after page lock but I
think apart from hacky that also won't work because we still need to
remove the check added for page locks in the deadlock code path in
commit 3ba59ccc89 and may need to do something for group locking. Feel
free to share any ideas if you have, I can try to evaluate those in
detail. I think in the worst case we need to remove the changes added
by 72e78d831a and 3ba59ccc89 which won't impact any existing feature
but will add a hurdle in parallelizing other write operations or even
improving the parallelism in vacuum (like allowing multiple workers
for an index).
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
