Re: Visibility Groups
От | Richard Huxton |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Visibility Groups |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 489B0430.4010809@archonet.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Visibility Groups (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs wrote: > On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 14:18 +0100, Richard Huxton wrote: >> >> An attempt to write to user_emails by T0 will fail with an error. > > All above correct > > The point of doing this is that *if* T0 becomes the oldest transaction > it will *not* interfere with removal of rows on "user_emails". > >> An attempt to read from user_emails by T0 will be allowed? > > No, reads must also be excluded otherwise MVCC will be violated. Ah good - I was wondering, but I read your first email as allowing reads. >> What happens if I'm in ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE? Presumably the read >> is disallowed then too? > > No, that's not relevant. That is your choice about how often you update > your snapshot of the database. The visibility group refers to the > *scope* of the snapshot, so the two things are orthogonal. So - effectively we're partitioning the database into (possibly overlapping) subsets of tables. Would it simplify things at all to have a centrally-defined list of "visibility scopes" (or "groups") which your transaction/user can access? As a DBA, I'd rather have somewhere central to manage this, and I'd probably make it per-user anyway. -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: