Re: index-only scans vs. Hot Standby, round two
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: index-only scans vs. Hot Standby, round two |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoY-YEfiOk6FcUhR3+KxAz9vhh3dKBNpxk3uvTwnQFWZ4Q@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: index-only scans vs. Hot Standby, round two (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: index-only scans vs. Hot Standby, round two
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > But fundamentally we all seem to be converging on some variant of the > "soft conflict" idea. So, as a first step, I've committed a patch that just throws a hard conflict. I think we probably want to optimize this further, and I'm going to work investigate that next. But it seemed productive to get this much out of the way first, so I did. In studying this, it strikes me that it would be rather nicer if we recovery conflicts could somehow arrange to roll back the active transaction by some means short of a FATAL error. I think there are some protocol issues with doing that, but I still wish we could figure out a way. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: