| From: | "Zeugswetter Andreas ADI SD" <Andreas(dot)Zeugswetter(at)s-itsolutions(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Guillaume Smet" <guillaume(dot)smet(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Euler Taveira de Oliveira" <euler(at)timbira(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUCvariable |
| Date: | 2008-01-30 09:56:47 |
| Message-ID: | E1539E0ED7043848906A8FF995BDA57902C23FC1@m0143.s-mxs.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
> > The plural seems better to me; there's no such thing as a solitary
> > synchronized scan, no? The whole point of the feature is to affect
> > the behavior of multiple scans.
>
> +1. The plural is important IMHO.
ok, good.
> As I stated earlier, I don't really like this argument (we already
> broke badly designed applications a few times in the past) but we
> really need a way to guarantee that the execution of a query is stable
> and doesn't depend on external factors. And the original problem was
> to guarantee that pg_dump builds a dump as identical as possible to
> the existing data by ignoring external factors. It's now the case with
> your patch.
> The fact that it allows us not to break existing applications relying
> too much on physical ordering is a nice side effect though :).
One more question. It would be possible that a session that turned off
the synchronized_seqscans still be a pack leader for other later
sessions.
Do/should we consider that ?
The procedure would be:
start from page 0
iff no other pack is present fill the current scan position for others
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kenneth Marshall | 2008-01-30 13:25:18 | Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUCvariable |
| Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2008-01-30 09:51:41 | Re: Will PostgreSQL get ported to CUDA? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kenneth Marshall | 2008-01-30 13:25:18 | Re: [PATCHES] Proposed patch: synchronized_scanning GUCvariable |
| Previous Message | Zoltan Boszormenyi | 2008-01-30 08:54:24 | Re: WIP: plpgsql source code obfuscation |