Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query
От | Thomas Munro |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAEepm=2Qm=iSo=KjVQj5yFU+zy268u-UgSPMRvzNk7TnORyu7A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:28 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote: > +SerializableXactHandle > +ShareSerializableXact(void) > +{ > + Assert(!IsParallelWorker()); > + > + return MySerializableXact; > +} > > Uh, how's that OK? There's no rule that you can't create a > ParallelContext in a worker. Parallel query currently doesn't, so it > probably won't happen, but burying an assertion to that effect in the > predicate locking code doesn't seem nice. Hmm. I suppose you could have a PARALLEL SAFE function that itself launches parallel workers explicitly (not via parallel query), and they should inherit the same SERIALIZABLEXACT from their parent and that should all just work. > Is "sxact" really the best (i.e. clearest) name we can come up with > for the lock tranche? Yeah, needs a better name. I have some lingering uncertainty about this patch and we're out of time, so I moved it to PG12 CF1. Thanks Haribabu, Robert, Amit for the reviews and comments so far. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: