On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:
> Are we OK with a 10% overhead, caused by the locking? That's probably
> acceptable if that's what it takes to get UPSERT. But it's not OK just to
> solve the deadlock issue with regular insertions into a table with exclusion
> constraints. Can we find a scheme to eliminate that overhead?
Looks like you tested a B-Tree index here. That doesn't seem
particularly representative of what you'd see with exclusion
constraints.
--
Peter Geoghegan
