From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Inadequate thought about buffer locking during hot standby replay |
Date: | 2012-11-13 18:43:34 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ3dHfqTp2xbXjx6Fxhfu-kv6vn=NB-5mvYk_gN_MyCiA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> Ok. It won't help all that much on 9.0, though.
>>
>> Well, it won't help GIST much, but the actually-reported-from-the-field
>> case is in btree, and it does fix that.
>>
>> It occurs to me that if we're sufficiently scared of this case, we could
>> probably hack the planner (in 9.0 only) to refuse to use GIST indexes
>> in hot-standby queries. That cure might be worse than the disease though.
>
> if anything, it should be documented. if you do this kind of thing
> people will stop installing bugfix releases.
Agreed. I think doing that in a back-branch release would be
extremely user-hostile.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-11-13 18:45:16 | Re: Proposal for Allow postgresql.conf values to be changed via SQL |
Previous Message | Gavin Flower | 2012-11-13 18:23:38 | Re: Inadequate thought about buffer locking during hot standby replay |