Re: GSOC Introduction / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions

From: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Mengxing Liu <liu-mx15(at)mails(dot)tsinghua(dot)edu(dot)cn>
Cc: gpapadrosou(at)gmail(dot)com, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GSOC Introduction / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions
Date: 2017-03-10 16:35:37
Message-ID: CACjxUsP0ObuZYq9NfJ6hLOnsHR-2+avcw63gBUoM0u3UeG3Ryw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> [two people interested in the same GSoC project]

It's an interesting problem to have.

If neither of you chooses to voluntarily back down, the obvious
resolution is for the mentors to vote on the better proposal. If we
do that early enough during the student application period, there
might still be time for the person whose proposal wasn't chosen to
submit a proposal for an alternative project. As I see it, that
means:

- I would tend to favor a proposal submitted on the first day
(beginning March 20 16:00 UTC), if only one is.

- I would push for very early voting by the PostgreSQL mentors.

--
Kevin Grittner

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2017-03-10 16:36:20 Re: Upgrading postmaster's log messages about bind/listen errors
Previous Message Petr Jelinek 2017-03-10 16:33:59 Re: Logical replication existing data copy