Possible optimization of heap_lock_tuple()

Started by Antonin Houskaabout 5 years ago1 messageshackers
Beta feature

Hackorum builds and tests every patch posted to the lists, not only commitfest submissions. This is Hackorum's own CI rather than the PostgreSQL project's, and it is still under testing - please report anything that looks wrong.

appliessuccessCI history

You can run a PostgreSQL built from this patch straight from Docker, with no checkout and no build:

docker run --rm -p 5432:5432 ghcr.io/hackorum-dev/postgres-patch:t44286
psql -h localhost -U postgres

Built from patchset v1 (message #1), August 24, 2026 at 11:27 AM.

Every patchset is also pushed to a branch of our PostgreSQL fork, so you can check out the same tree CI built. Without a PostgreSQL checkout:

git clone --branch t44286_1 https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.git

In a checkout you already have, add the fork once:

git remote add hackorum https://github.com/hackorum-dev/postgres.git

then, for this patchset and every later one:

git fetch hackorum t44286_1 && git checkout t44286_1

Patchset v1 (message #1) is on t44286_1

Jump to latest
#1Antonin Houska
ah@cybertec.at

It seems that a concurrent UPDATE can restart heap_lock_tuple() even if it's
not necessary. Is the attached proposal correct and worth applying?

--
Antonin Houska
Web: https://www.cybertec-postgresql.com

Attachments:

t44286_1
heap_lock_tuple.difftext/x-diffDownload+1-1