Tom Lane wrote:
>The comment for AtCommit_Portals points out that there are risks of this
>sort, but I don't think you've described it properly. The
>SPI_cursor_close operation is probably failing not succeeding, because
>AtCommit_Portals will never find an already-deleted portal ---
>hash_seq_search() shouldn't return any already-dropped entries.
>
>
The hash_seq_search keeps track of what element that it should return
next when it peruses a bucket. Removing that element from the table
won't change anything since the HASH_SEQ_STATUS remains unaffected. It
still holds onto that element and hence, will return it on next iteration.
This should be considered a bug I think.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
