Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Inadequate thought about buffer locking during hot standby replay

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Inadequate thought about buffer locking during hot standby replay
Date: 2012-11-13 18:43:34
Message-ID: CA+TgmoZ3dHfqTp2xbXjx6Fxhfu-kv6vn=NB-5mvYk_gN_MyCiA@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Ok. It won't help all that much on 9.0, though.
>>
>> Well, it won't help GIST much, but the actually-reported-from-the-field
>> case is in btree, and it does fix that.
>>
>> It occurs to me that if we're sufficiently scared of this case, we could
>> probably hack the planner (in 9.0 only) to refuse to use GIST indexes
>> in hot-standby queries.  That cure might be worse than the disease though.
>
> if anything, it should be documented.  if you do this kind of thing
> people will stop installing bugfix releases.

Agreed.  I think doing that in a back-branch release would be
extremely user-hostile.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2012-11-13 18:45:16
Subject: Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL
Previous:From: Gavin FlowerDate: 2012-11-13 18:23:38
Subject: Re: Inadequate thought about buffer locking during hot standby replay

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group