| From: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, nicolas(dot)barbier(at)gmail(dot)com, gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at |
| Subject: | Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking |
| Date: | 2010-01-07 08:13:08 |
| Message-ID: | 4B459794.5030602@bluegap.ch |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Kevin Grittner wrote:
> We're very much on the same page. My goal was to get predicate
> locking that didn't miss anything, even though it was ridiculously
> coarse, then implement the simplest possible SSI on top of it, without
> worrying about optimizations, then incrementally move toward
> production quality. I clearly didn't communicate that as well as I'd
> hoped. :-(
I understood it now :-) And I think it generally is a good plan.
I sort of missed the predicate locking step from the wiki's Development
Path. I now see it has its own section above. Is there any such plan of
development for predicate locking? To me that seems to be the harder
problem (due to being more general).
Regards
Markus Wanner
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fujii Masao | 2010-01-07 08:26:19 | Re: 'replication' keyword on .pgpass (Streaming Replication) |
| Previous Message | Markus Wanner | 2010-01-07 07:56:08 | Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking |