| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hot standby, race condition between recovery snapshot and commit |
| Date: | 2009-11-14 21:08:51 |
| Message-ID: | 1258232931.14054.942.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, 2009-11-14 at 14:59 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> There's a race condition ....
Yes, I believe this is a major showstopper for the current
approach/attempt....but...
> I can't see any obvious way around that.
Huh? We're only doing this strict locking approach because you insisted
that the looser approach was not acceptable. Have you forgotten that
discussion so completely that you can't even remember the existence of
other options?
It amazes me that you should then use locking overhead as the reason to
not pursue the current approach further, which was exactly my argument
for not pursuing it in the first place.
You're leading me a merry dance.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2009-11-14 21:22:38 | Re: Inspection of row types in pl/pgsql and pl/sql |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2009-11-14 21:02:55 | Re: patch - per-tablespace random_page_cost/seq_page_cost |