From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Read Uncommitted |
Date: | 2019-12-18 18:26:31 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoaf6Xxf+0JxKiUP+rzGTABQ7-2S8R061+J7tBVyLnBBig@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 1:06 PM Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> So this is the same discussion as elsewhere about potentially aborted transactions...
Yep.
> AFAIK, the worst that happens in that case is that the reading transaction will end with an ERROR, similar to a serializable error.
I'm not convinced of that. There's a big difference between a
serializable error, which is an error that is expected to be
user-facing and was designed with that in mind, and just failing a
bunch of random sanity checks all over the backend. If those sanity
checks happen to be less than comprehensive, which I suspect is
likely, there will probably be scenarios where you can crash a backend
and cause a system-wide restart. And you can probably also return just
plain wrong answers to queries in some scenarios.
> Just consider this part of the recovery toolkit.
I agree that it would be useful to have a recovery toolkit for reading
uncommitted data, but I think a lot more thought needs to be given to
how such a thing should be designed. If you just add something called
READ UNCOMMITTED, people are going to expect it to have *way* saner
semantics than this will. They'll use it routinely, not just as a
last-ditch mechanism to recover otherwise-lost data. And I'm
reasonably confident that will not work out well.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2019-12-18 18:34:57 | Re: Restore backup file "with oids" |
Previous Message | Ranier Vf | 2019-12-18 18:20:40 | [PATCH] Windows port: add support to setenv function |