Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem
Date
Msg-id 8730.990477994@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem  ("Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM> writes:
>> I'm not sure that the time to do projection is short though
>> --- what if there are arbitrary user-defined functions in the quals
>> or the projection targetlist?

> Well, while we are on this subject I finally should say about issue
> bothered me for long time: only "simple" functions should be allowed
> to deal with data in shared buffers directly. "Simple" means: no SQL
> queries there. Why? One reason: we hold shlock on buffer while doing
> seqscan qual - what if qual' SQL queries will try to acquire exclock
> on the same buffer?

I think we're there already: AFAICT, user-specified quals and
projections are done after dropping the buffer shlock.  (Yes, I know
there's a HeapKeyTest inside heapgettup, but user quals don't get
done there.)  We do still hold a pin, but that seems OK to me.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: reina@nsi.edu (Tony Reina)
Date:
Subject: Re: Detecting readline in configure
Next
From: Barry Lind
Date:
Subject: Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem