Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Albe Laurenz
Subject Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking
Date
Msg-id D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C202FF65B3@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
Responses Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking  ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>)
List pgsql-hackers
Kevin Grittner wrote:
> > Where does T1 select rows that were modified by T0? It selects only
> > one row, the one it modified itself, right?
>
> You have to select it to know whether to count it, right?

We are getting closer.

So an SIREAD lock is taken for every row that is examined during
the execution of an execution plan?

Ah.

What if there is an index on the "ishighlander" row?
Then an index scan would find only one candidate to examine,
and the other rows would not even be touched by the execution plan.
Then how would they contract an SIREAD lock?

Yours,
Laurenz Albe


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Kevin Grittner"
Date:
Subject: Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking
Next
From: Heikki Linnakangas
Date:
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #4796: Recovery followed by backup creates unrecoverable WAL-file