Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CA+hUKGK8xPpi-vQLO0ecGgB7Lm5qe2Ps8GS5RjJk79nnO4jVKA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation (Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>) |
Ответы |
Re: Potential G2-item cycles under serializable isolation
|
Список | pgsql-bugs |
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 1:26 PM Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie> wrote: > The functionality in question (the code from the > HeapCheckForSerializableConflictOut() case statement) was originally > discussed here, with the details finalized less than a week before SSI > was committed in 2011: > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/1296499247.11513.777.camel%40jdavis#9e407424df5f8794360b6e84de60200a > > It hasn't really changed since that time. Right, the only change was to move things around a bit to suport new table AMs. Speaking of which, it looks like the new comment atop CheckForSerializableConflictOut() could use some adjustment. It says "A table AM is reading a tuple that has been modified. After determining that it is visible to us, it should call this function..." but it seems the truth is a bit more complicated than that.
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: