| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Atri Sharma <atri(dot)jiit(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Do we need so many hint bits? |
| Date: | 2012-11-19 18:49:27 |
| Message-ID: | 20121119184927.GC3252@awork2.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2012-11-19 10:46:37 -0800, Jeff Davis wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-11-20 at 00:13 +0530, Atri Sharma wrote:
>
> > My mistake...I thought we were more concerned about the cost of
> > locking.
> >
> > I agree, locking many data pages simultaneously could be hazardous.
> >
> > This requires more thought.Maybe removing PD_ALL_VISIBLE isnt such a
> > great idea after all...
>
> As I said elsewhere in the thread, I'm not planning to introduce any
> additional locking. There is already precedent in IndexOnlyNext.
Yea, but that precedent is only valid because IOS does check for a MVCC
snapshots. Also it doesn't set anything.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-11-19 19:46:51 | Re: Do we need so many hint bits? |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2012-11-19 18:46:37 | Re: Do we need so many hint bits? |