Re: Reducing relation locking overhead

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Reducing relation locking overhead
Date: 2005-12-03 16:57:49
Message-ID: 712.1133629069@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kevin Brown <kevin(at)sysexperts(dot)com> writes:
> In the above for large relations, the bulk of the REINDEX should
> happen without any locks being held by the REINDEX operation.

As I just pointed out to Greg, the arm-waving notion that you can "turn
off the FSM" requires a great deal of low-level locking that is not
there now. Even ignoring that, you *still* have a lock upgrade problem
in this sketch.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-12-03 17:00:32 Re: [HACKERS] snprintf() argument reordering not working under Windows
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-12-03 16:53:55 Re: Strange left join problems in 8.1