Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression
Date
Msg-id 28251.1494437319@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Concurrent ALTER SEQUENCE RESTART Regression  (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>)
List pgsql-hackers
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2017-05-10 10:29:02 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> As long as it doesn't block, the change in lock strength doesn't actually
>> make any speed difference does it?

> The issue isn't the strength, but that we currently have this weird
> hackery around open_share_lock():

Oh!  I'd forgotten about that.  Yes, if we change that then we'd
need to do some performance checking.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Should pg_current_wal_location() become pg_current_wal_lsn()
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [POC] hash partitioning