Re: cheaper snapshots - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hannu Krosing
Subject Re: cheaper snapshots
Date
Msg-id 1311871704.3117.1577.camel@hvost
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: cheaper snapshots  (Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: cheaper snapshots
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 2011-07-28 at 18:05 +0200, Hannu Krosing wrote:

> But it is also possible, that you can get logically consistent snapshots
> by protecting only some ops. for example, if you protect only insert and
> get snapshot, then the worst that can happen is that you get a snapshot
> that is a few commits older than what youd get with full locking and it
> may well be ok for all real uses.

Thinking more of it, we should lock commit/remove_txid and get_snapshot

having a few more running backends does not make a difference, but
seeing commits in wrong order may.

this will cause contention between commit and get_snapshot, but
hopefully less than current ProcArray manipulation, as there is just one
simple C array to lock and copy.

-- 
-------
Hannu Krosing
PostgreSQL Infinite Scalability and Performance Consultant
PG Admin Book: http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/books/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Hannu Krosing
Date:
Subject: Re: cheaper snapshots
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: New partitioning WAS: Check constraints on partition parents only?