Re: Serializable snapshot isolation error logging

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
>> What is the likelyhood that there exists an update pattern that
>> always give the failure in the slow transaction ?
>
> I don't know how to quantify that.  I haven't seen it yet in
> testing, but many of my tests so far have been rather contrived.  We
> disparately need more testing of this patch with realistic
> workloads.

I'm really hoping that Tom or Heikki will have a chance to take a
serious look at this patch soon with a view to committing it. It
sounds like Kevin has done a great deal of testing on his own, but
we're not going to really get field experience with this until it's in
the tree. It would be nice to get this in well before feature freeze
so that we have a chance to see what shakes out while there's still
time to adjust it. Recall that Hot Standby was committed in December
and we were still adjusting the code in May. It would be much nicer
to commit in September and finish up adjusting the code in February.
It helps get the release out on schedule.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company