From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(dot)tiikkaja(at)cs(dot)helsinki(dot)fi>, Steve Singer <ssinger_pg(at)sympatico(dot)ca>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies |
Date: | 2011-02-28 19:14:59 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTi=A0pDdmCb-tjA0=pusZcXDp6SF5YviAcWrhb6r@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> I'm afraid that the goals of this patch might be similarly obsolete.
>
>> No, I don't think so. IIUC, the problem is that EXPLAIN ANALYZE runs
>> the rewrite products with different snapshot handling than the regular
>> execution path.
>
> Possibly, but it's not clear to me that this patch fixes that.
> As I said, it's no longer obvious what the patch means to do, and I'd
> like a clear statement of that.
Fair enough. I assume Marko will provide that shortly. I believe the
consensus was to make the regular case behave like EXPLAIN ANALYZE
rather than the other way around...
>> So in theory you could turn on auto_explain and have
>> the semantics of your queries change. That would be Bad.
>
> That's just FUD. auto_explain doesn't run EXPLAIN ANALYZE.
Oh, woops. I stand corrected. But I guess the query might behave
differently with and without EXPLAIN ANALYZE?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2011-02-28 19:17:02 | Re: Sync Rep v17 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-02-28 19:03:43 | Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies |