Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
| От | Simon Riggs |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CA+U5nMJmHizgiH2TZQWvxftMYjT1Td-WLHB5-PsaoSVQeh9cBA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe (Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe
Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe Re: ALTER TABLE lock strength reduction patch is unsafe |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 05:09:16PM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote: >> Attached patch makes SnapshotNow into an MVCC snapshot, initialised at >> the start of each scan iff SnapshotNow is passed as the scan's >> snapshot. It's fairly brief but seems to do the trick. > > That's a neat trick. However, if you start a new SnapshotNow scan while one is > ongoing, the primordial scan's snapshot will change mid-stream. Do we ever do that? (and if so, Why?!? or perhaps just Where?) We can use more complex code if required, but we'll be adding complexity and code into the main path that I'd like to avoid. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: