Re: BUG #3479: contraint exclusion and locks

From: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: "Tiago Daniel Jacobs" <tiago(at)mdtestudio(dot)com(dot)br>
Cc: "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: BUG #3479: contraint exclusion and locks
Date: 2007-07-23 22:23:20
Message-ID: 1185229400.4284.439.camel@ebony.site
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 11:46 -0300, Tiago Daniel Jacobs wrote:
> Tom and Gregory. U're right! The problem is that we're using
> constraints for partitioned tables and by definition, a partition
> never, absolutely never, can affect the entire system.
>
Yeh, the problem is that partitioning uses additional information to
avoid reading data. The additional information and the actual data need
to be kept in step, so at some point we may need to re-write that data
and we'll always need a lock to do that.

So whether we use constraints, segment headers or what have you,
there'll still be a need to lock and be locked out.

--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2007-07-24 00:01:19 Re: BUG #3476: description of root.crt/crl in documentation
Previous Message Kris Jurka 2007-07-23 17:32:24 Re: BUG #3480: JDBC driver: getIndexInfo() returns quotes around quoted column names