Re: synchronized snapshots
От | Florian Pflug |
---|---|
Тема | Re: synchronized snapshots |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6F6E036F-42E2-4863-BB61-AC14EC1F1A4D@phlo.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: synchronized snapshots ("Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov>) |
Ответы |
Re: synchronized snapshots
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Oct19, 2011, at 19:49 , Kevin Grittner wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org> writes: > >>>> This allows a deferrable snapshot to be used on a second >>>> connection (by e.g. pg_dump), and still be marked as DEFERRABLE. >>>> If we throw an error unconditionally, the second connection has >>>> to import the snapshot without marking it DEFERRABLE, which I >>>> think has consequences for performance. >>> >>> No, I don't believe that either. AIUI the performance benefit >>> comes if the snapshot is recognized as safe. DEFERRABLE only >>> means to keep retrying until you get a safe one. > > Right, there are other circumstances in which a READ ONLY > transaction's snapshot may be recognized as safe, and it can opt out > of all the additional SSI logic. As you say, DEFERRABLE means we > *wait* for that. Oh, cool. I thought the opt-out only works for explicitly DEFERRABLE transactions. best regards, Florian Pflug
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: