| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt |
| Date: | 2012-03-16 13:40:01 |
| Message-ID: | 1331905118-sup-7192@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Alvaro Herrera's message of vie mar 16 10:36:11 -0300 2012:
> > Now I am confused. Where do you see the word "hint" used by
> > HEAP_XMAX_EXCL_LOCK and HEAP_XMAX_SHARED_LOCK. These are tuple infomask
> > bits, not hints, meaning they are not optional or there just for
> > performance.
>
> Okay, I think this is just a case of confusing terminology. I have
> always assumed (because I have not seen any evidence to the contrary)
> that anything in t_infomask and t_infomask2 is a "hint bit" --
> regardless of it being actually a hint or something with a stronger
> significance.
Maybe this is just my mistake. I see in
http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Hint_Bits that we only call the
COMMITTED/INVALID infomask bits "hints".
I think it's easy enough to correct the README to call them "infomask
bits" rather than hints .. I'll go do that.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-03-16 13:50:55 | Re: Command Triggers, v16 |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2012-03-16 13:36:11 | Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt |