Re: SPGist "triple parity" concept doesn't work - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: SPGist "triple parity" concept doesn't work
Date
Msg-id 15703.1371234518@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: SPGist "triple parity" concept doesn't work  (Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
Teodor Sigaev <teodor@sigaev.ru> writes:
>> Anyway I now think that we might be better off with the other idea of
>> abandoning an insertion and retrying if we get a lock conflict.

> done, look at the patch.

Looks good, committed with some cosmetic adjustments.

> We definetly need new idea of locking protocol and I'll return to this
> problem at autumn (sorry, I havn't time in summer to do this
> research).

OK.  I think the performance of this way will be okay, actually, in most
cases anyhow.  It'll do till we have a better idea.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Re: Hard to Use WAS: Hard limit on WAL space
Next
From: Fabien COELHO
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pgbench --throttle (submission 7 - with lag measurement)