Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Date
Msg-id CA+U5nM+f9Cyv4Ufs14ODO7jrT2vkEYhGRcwJANwLgebX49Cw+w@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe  (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 3 March 2014 15:19, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:12 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:

> What I'm
> really concerned about is whether there are other things like the
> SnapshotNow issues that can cause stuff to halt and catch fire.  I
> don't know whether there are or are not, but that's my concern.

Of course its a concern, I feel it also. But that's why we have beta
period to handle the unknowns.

The question is are there any specific areas of concern here? If not,
then we commit because we've done a lot of work on it and at the
moment the balance is high benefit to users against a non-specific
feeling of risk.

@Noah - Last call...

-- Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Stephen Frost
Date:
Subject: Re: Custom Scan APIs (Re: Custom Plan node)
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: heapgetpage() and ->takenDuringRecovery