On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@gmail.com> wrote:
> My initial thought is that since reducing the false positive rate
> would only help when there was a high rate of conflicts under the
> existing patch, and it would add code complexity and cost for the
> case where conflict rate is low, that we might want to just leave
> the current fix and see whether there are complaints from the field
> about the false positive rate.
>
> Reducing the rate of false positive serialization failures is a
> worthy goal, but it's gotta make sense from a cost/benefit
> perspective.
What are your thoughts on the back-and-forth between myself and Tom
concerning predicate locks within heap_fetch_tuple() path last
weekend? I now think that there might be an outstanding concern about
ON CONFLICT DO NOTHING + SSI here.
--
Peter Geoghegan
