On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Thomas Munro > If that is indeed a race, could it be fixed by > calling PredicateLockPageSplit() at the start of _hash_splitbucket() > instead? >
Yes, but I think it would be better if we call this once we are sure that at least one tuple from the old bucket has been transferred (consider if all tuples in the old bucket are dead).
Is it really fair? For example, predicate lock can be held by session
which queried some key, but didn't find any corresponding tuple.
If we imagine this key should be in new bucket while all existing
tuples would be left in old bucket. As I get, in this case no locks
would be transferred since no tuples were moved to the new bucket.
So, further insertion to the new bucket wouldn't conflict with session,
which looked for non-existing key, while it should. Do it make sense?
