Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 11086.1156276660@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build (Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>) |
Ответы |
Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build
Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build Re: Tricky bugs in concurrent index build |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu> writes: > Is it not possible to brute force this adding an AM method to insert without > the uniqueness check? Hm. Actually there already is a feature of aminsert to allow suppressing the unique check, but I'm not sure whether using it for RECENTLY_DEAD tuples helps. Seems like we have to wait to see whether DELETE_IN_PROGRESS deleters commit in any case. >> Have I missed anything? This is tricky stuff. > Wow, that seems pretty unsatisfactory, all the waiting and locking sounds > awful. Yeah, I'm very unhappy. The whole idea may be going down in flames :-( It's fairly clear that we could support concurrent builds of nonunique indexes, but is that enough of a use-case to justify it? regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: