Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt
Date
Msg-id 1331905118-sup-7192@alvh.no-ip.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Responses Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt  (Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Excerpts from Alvaro Herrera's message of vie mar 16 10:36:11 -0300 2012:

> > Now I am confused.  Where do you see the word "hint" used by
> > HEAP_XMAX_EXCL_LOCK and HEAP_XMAX_SHARED_LOCK.  These are tuple infomask
> > bits, not hints, meaning they are not optional or there just for
> > performance.
>
> Okay, I think this is just a case of confusing terminology.  I have
> always assumed (because I have not seen any evidence to the contrary)
> that anything in t_infomask and t_infomask2 is a "hint bit" --
> regardless of it being actually a hint or something with a stronger
> significance.

Maybe this is just my mistake.  I see in
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Hint_Bits that we only call the
COMMITTED/INVALID infomask bits "hints".

I think it's easy enough to correct the README to call them "infomask
bits" rather than hints .. I'll go do that.

--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Command Triggers, v16