Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Greg Sabino Mullane
Subject Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation
Date
Msg-id 20111010182558.GE3007@tinybird.home
Whole thread Raw
Responses Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation  (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>)
Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation  (Dan Ports <drkp@csail.mit.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
I'm looking into upgrading a fairly busy system to 9.1. They use
serializable mode for a few certain things, and suffer through some
serialization errors as a result. While looking over the new
serializable/SSI documentation, one thing that stood out is:

http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/interactive/transaction-iso.html

"The monitoring of read/write dependencies has a cost, as does the restart of
transactions which are terminated with a serialization failure, but balanced
against the cost and blocking involved in use of explicit locks and SELECT
FOR UPDATE or SELECT FOR SHARE, Serializable transactions are the best
performance choice for some environments."

I agree it is better versus SELECT FOR, but what about repeatable read versus
the new serializable? How much overhead is there in the 'monitoring of
read/write dependencies'? This is my only concern at the moment. Are we
talking insignificant overhead? Minor? Is it measurable? Hard to say without
knowing the number of txns, number of locks, etc.?

--
Greg Sabino Mullane greg@endpoint.com
End Point Corporation
PGP Key: 0x14964AC8

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: SET variable - Permission issues
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: ALTER EXTENSION .. ADD/DROP weirdness