Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 8223.1393862000@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com> writes: > On 3 March 2014 15:19, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: >> What I'm >> really concerned about is whether there are other things like the >> SnapshotNow issues that can cause stuff to halt and catch fire. I >> don't know whether there are or are not, but that's my concern. > Of course its a concern, I feel it also. But that's why we have beta > period to handle the unknowns. I have exactly zero faith that beta testing would catch low-probability problems in this area. What's needed, and hasn't happened AFAIK, is detailed study of the patch by assorted senior hackers. > The question is are there any specific areas of concern here? If not, > then we commit because we've done a lot of work on it and at the > moment the balance is high benefit to users against a non-specific > feeling of risk. This is backwards. The default decision around here has never been to commit when in doubt. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: