Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold <
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20160719233250.nir5vyvzef7m4e7z@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < (Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in
GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold <
Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-07-19 18:09:59 -0500, Kevin Grittner wrote: > As far as I can see, to do this the way that Andres and Amit > suggest involves tying in to indexam.c and other code in incredibly > ugly ways. Could you explain the problem you're seing? Isn't pretty much all all that we need to do: 1) add a InitSnapshotToast(Snapshot originMVCCSnap), which sets SnapshotData->lsn to the the origin snapshot's lsn 2) adapt TestForOldSnapshot() to accept both HeapTupleSatisfiesMVCC and HeapTupleSatisfiesToast? I mean the only difference between toast / plain heap table WRT old_snapshot_threshold is that we don't use a mvcc snapshot. > I think it is entirely the wrong way to go, as I can't > find a way to make it look remotely sane. The question is whether > I should do it the way that I think is sane, or whether someone > else wants to show me what I'm missing by producing at least a > rough patch along these lines. I'll, but I'd prefer you explaining the problem first. Maybe it's me missing the obvious problem. Andres
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: