| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Preliminary notes about hash index concurrency (long) |
| Date: | 2003-09-01 19:45:19 |
| Message-ID: | 1062445518.3629.6.camel@fuji.krosing.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane kirjutas E, 01.09.2003 kell 15:41:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > I know someone reported a problem with the hash indexes (data loss,
> > serious)--- was that a new 7.4 but or something that has existed for a
> > long time?
>
> AFAICT the bug's been there since Berkeley days.
One could check how BSDDB (http://www.sleepycat.com) handles these
issues. It is reported to have started as btree/hash index code
extracted from an early version of postgres, so perhaps there one could
at least get some ideas, though their locking / concurrency control are
probably much different.
--------------
Hannu
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | ohp | 2003-09-01 19:59:11 | Re: Index creation takes for ever |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2003-09-01 19:21:10 | Re: pg_dump and REVOKE on function |