Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 3:25 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:

Alexander Korotkov wrote:

> And what happen if somebody concurrently set (fastupdate = on)?
> Can we miss conflicts because of that?

I think it'd be better to have that option require AccessExclusive lock,
so that it can never be changed concurrently with readers.  Seems to me
that penalizing every single read to cope with this case would be a bad
trade-off.

As Andrey Borodin mentioned, we already do.  Sorry for buzz :)