Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Alexander Korotkov
Subject Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)
Date
Msg-id CAPpHfduns_j0jn2VGXvwDLP31dUXYU=3WCC31DzkG_Qe5WDFbQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)  (Shubham Barai <shubhambaraiss@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)
Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 11:53 AM, Shubham Barai <shubhambaraiss@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, page-level predicate locking should happen only when fast update is off.
Actually, I forgot to put conditions in updated patch. Does everything else look ok ?

I think that isolation tests should be improved.  It doesn't seems that any posting tree would be generated by the tests that you've provided, because all the TIDs could fit the single posting list.  Note, that you can get some insight into GIN physical structure using pageinspect contrib.

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Adam Brusselback
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] generated columns
Next
From: Petr Jelinek
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Issues with logical replication