Thread: MVCC doc improvements
This patch improves the MVCC documentation: I added some additional discussion of deadlock conditions, removed a mis-statement about index locking, and made minor edits in a couple other places. Cheers, Neil -- Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
Attachment
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> This patch improves the MVCC documentation: I added some additional
> discussion of deadlock conditions, removed a mis-statement about index
> locking, and made minor edits in a couple other places.
> - </para>
> -
> - <para>
> - In short, B-tree indexes are the recommended index type for concurrent
> - applications.
> </para>
AFAICS, that is not a misstatement. B-trees are still the only
recommended index type for concurrent-update situations ...
hash has deadlock issues and the other two are just plain not
concurrent.
regards, tom lane
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 11:35, Tom Lane wrote: > AFAICS, that is not a misstatement. B-trees are still the only > recommended index type for concurrent-update situations ... > hash has deadlock issues and the other two are just plain not > concurrent. Yes, but what I disagree with is the recommendation that "concurrent applications" should use B-trees -- a concurrent application that wishes to index non-scalar data won't have a lot of success using B-trees, page-level locks or not... Cheers, Neil -- Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> || PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> Yes, but what I disagree with is the recommendation that "concurrent
> applications" should use B-trees -- a concurrent application that wishes
> to index non-scalar data won't have a lot of success using B-trees,
True, there are cases where you have no choice. That does not mean that
we should fail to make this recommendation for cases where you have a
choice.
I'm not objecting to improving the text. I am objecting to deleting it
outright...
regards, tom lane
On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 11:53, Tom Lane wrote: > I'm not objecting to improving the text. I am objecting to deleting it > outright... Ok, fair enough. I've attached a revised version of the patch -- let me know you think it needs further improvements. Cheers, Neil
Attachment
Your patch has been added to the PostgreSQL unapplied patches list at:
http://momjian.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/pgpatches
I will try to apply it within the next 48 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Neil Conway wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 11:53, Tom Lane wrote:
> > I'm not objecting to improving the text. I am objecting to deleting it
> > outright...
>
> Ok, fair enough. I've attached a revised version of the patch -- let me
> know you think it needs further improvements.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Neil
[ Attachment, skipping... ]
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
Patch applied. Thanks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Neil Conway wrote: > On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 11:53, Tom Lane wrote: > > I'm not objecting to improving the text. I am objecting to deleting it > > outright... > > Ok, fair enough. I've attached a revised version of the patch -- let me > know you think it needs further improvements. > > Cheers, > > Neil [ Attachment, skipping... ] > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command > (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org) -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073