Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)
Date
Msg-id 20180313122510.xx2cumfyv2wfr5jn@alvherre.pgsql
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)  (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)  (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>)
List pgsql-hackers
Alexander Korotkov wrote:

> And what happen if somebody concurrently set (fastupdate = on)?
> Can we miss conflicts because of that?

I think it'd be better to have that option require AccessExclusive lock,
so that it can never be changed concurrently with readers.  Seems to me
that penalizing every single read to cope with this case would be a bad
trade-off.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)
Next
From: Andrey Borodin
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)