Re: Unify drop-by-OID functions
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Unify drop-by-OID functions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+TgmoYwtYq6aRRsOnqJ+vb6HwwPFAqPuT=fxHyrhVo7Rw5EdA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Unify drop-by-OID functions (Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Unify drop-by-OID functions
Re: Unify drop-by-OID functions |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 1, 2020 at 5:32 PM Ranier Vilela <ranier.vf@gmail.com> wrote: > I can suggest improvements? > > 1. In case Object is cached, delay open_table until the last moment, for the row to be blocked as little as possible andclose the table as quickly as possible. > 2. In case Object is cached and the tuple is invalid, do not open table. > 3. Otherwise, is it possible to call systable_endscan, after table_close? > > I think that lock resources, for as little time as possible, it is an advantage.. Only if it's correct, which (3) definitely wouldn't be, and I'm doubtful about (1) as well. This reminds me: I think that the issues in http://postgr.es/m/CA+TgmoYaFYRRdRZ94p_Qdt+1oONg6sMOvbkGHKVsFtONCrFkhw@mail.gmail.com should be considered here - we should guarantee that there's a snapshot registered continuously from before the call to SearchSysCache1 until after the call to CatalogTupleDelete. In the systable_beginscan case, we should be fine as long as the systable_endscan follows the CatalogTupleDelete call. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: