Re: SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: <Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "Dan Ports" <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu>
Subject: Re: SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock
Date: 2011-06-03 18:04:19
Message-ID: 4DE8DBD3020000250003E0F6@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 1 May 2011 I wrote:

> Consider this a WIP patch

Just so people know where this stands...

By 8 May 2011 I had the attached. I didn't post it because I was
not confident I had placed the calls to the SSI functions for DROP
TABLE and TRUNCATE TABLE correctly. Then came PGCon and also the
row versus tuple discussion -- the patch for which had conflicts
with this one.

I will be reviewing this on the weekend and making any final
adjustments, but the patch is very likely to look just like this
with the possible exception of placement of the DROP TABLE and
TRUNCATE TABLE calls. If anyone wants to start reviewing this now,
it would leave more time for me to make changes if needed.

Also, if anyone has comments or hints about the placement of those
calls, I'd be happy to receive them.

This patch compiles with `make world`, passes `make check-world`,
and passes both `make installcheck-world` and `make -C
src/test/isolation installcheck` against a database with
default_transaction_isolation = 'serializable'. It also passed a
few ad hoc tests of the implemented functionality.

-Kevin

Attachment Content-Type Size
ssi-ddl-2.patch text/plain 20.1 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2011-06-03 18:07:44 Re: Domains versus polymorphic functions, redux
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2011-06-03 18:01:41 Remove support for 'userlocks'?