"Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote
> "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq@cs.toronto.edu> writes:
> > After this, the proc->sem will be bumped to 1 unexpectedly ... Since
this
> > problem is rare, a possible fix is to put a critical section around line
1
> > to 7 and remove UnlockBuffers() accordingly.
>
> No, that would make any attempt to control-C a VACUUM have a significant
> probability for panicking the whole database.
>
Why panicking by control-C? Is that critical section can prevent any signal
processing?
Regards,
Qingqing