Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt
Date
Msg-id CA+TgmoZx300pkRkL27-ejWAcHCp-6-1MuyMvotJZqX91qyzOtA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt  (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> You still have HEAP_XMAX_{INVALID,COMMITTED} to reduce the pressure on mxid
>>> lookups, so I think something more sophisticated is needed to exercise that
>>> cost.  Not sure what.
>>
>> I don't think HEAP_XMAX_COMMITTED is much help, because committed !=
>> all-visible.
>
> So because committed does not equal all visible there will be
> additional lookups on mxids? That's complete rubbish.

Noah seemed to be implying that once the updating transaction
committed, HEAP_XMAX_COMMITTED would get set and save the mxid lookup.But I think that's not true, because anyone who
looksat the tuple 
afterward will still need to know the exact xmax, to test it against
their snapshot.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Storage Manager crash at mdwrite()
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt