Re: *sigh*
От | Randolf Richardson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: *sigh* |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Xns9445D70A46474rr8xca@200.46.204.72 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | *sigh* (Thomas Zehetbauer <thomasz@hostmaster.org>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
>> The count(*) information can be revisioned too, am I wrong ? I'm able >> to create a trigger that store the count(*) information in a special >> table, why not implement the same in a way "builded in" ? > > Then every insert or delete would have to lock that count. Nobody else > would be able to insert or delete any records until you either commit or > roll back. > > That would lead to much lower concurrency, much more contention for > locks, and tons of deadlocks. What about queueing all these updates for a separate low-priority thread? The thread would be the only one with access to update this field. -- Randolf Richardson - rr@8x.ca Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Please do not eMail me directly when responding to my postings in the newsgroups.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: