Re: remove spurious CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY wait - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Michael Paquier
Subject Re: remove spurious CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY wait
Date
Msg-id 20201113002540.GA1631@paquier.xyz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: remove spurious CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY wait  (Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: remove spurious CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY wait  (Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 04:36:32PM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
> Interesting enough, similar discussion happened about vaccumFlags before
> with the same conclusion that theoretically it's fine to update without
> holding the lock, but this assumption could change one day and it's
> better to avoid such risks. Having said that I believe it makes sense to
> continue with locking. Are there any other opinions? I'll try to
> benchmark it in the meantime.

Thanks for planning some benchmarking for this specific patch.  I have
to admit that the possibility of switching vacuumFlags to use atomics
is very appealing in the long term, with or without considering this
patch, even if we had better be sure that this patch has no actual
effect on concurrency first if atomics are not used in worst-case
scenarios.
--
Michael

Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: Optimising latch signals
Next
From: "tsunakawa.takay@fujitsu.com"
Date:
Subject: RE: Detecting File Damage & Inconsistencies