Re: concurrent index builds unneeded lock?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Theo Schlossnagle <jesus(at)omniti(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: concurrent index builds unneeded lock?
Date: 2009-07-12 15:51:20
Message-ID: 16144.1247413880@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Actually ... why do we have to have that third wait step at all?
Doesn't the indcheckxmin mechanism render it unnecessary, or couldn't
we adjust the comparison xmin to make it unnecessary?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Greg Stark 2009-07-12 15:52:03 Re: concurrent index builds unneeded lock?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-07-12 15:42:30 Re: concurrent index builds unneeded lock?