Re: Refactoring speculative insertion with unique indexes a little - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Geoghegan
Subject Re: Refactoring speculative insertion with unique indexes a little
Date
Msg-id CAM3SWZTFK4-dknq7Tar7eRc5JUP3GKdFCUK_06sM8oqPpk4F5g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Refactoring speculative insertion with unique indexes a little  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com> wrote:
> I said "basically uncontroversial", not "uncontroversial". That is a
> perfectly accurate characterization of the patch, and if you disagree
> than I suggest you re-read the thread.

In particular, note that Alvaro eventually sided with me against the
thing that Heikki argued for:

http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20160118195643.GA117199@alvherre.pgsql

Describing what happened that way is unfair on Heikki, because I don't
think he was at all firm in what he said about making the new
UNIQUE_CHECK_SPECULATIVE "like CHECK_UNIQUE_YES, but return FALSE
instead of throwing an error on conflict". We were working through the
design, and it didn't actually come to any kind of impasse.

It's surprising and disappointing to me that this supposed
disagreement has been blown out of all proportion.

-- 
Peter Geoghegan



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Chris Ruprecht
Date:
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] OS X 10.11.3, psql, bus error 10, 9.5.1
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification