Re: WIP: Detecting SSI conflicts before reporting constraint violations

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: WIP: Detecting SSI conflicts before reporting constraint violations
Date: 2016-03-10 20:36:28
Message-ID: CAEepm=2gt1k49EBF18HNvpFD3ezR1sOqNMX+CsVDhxPs0aJaQQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On 3 February 2016 at 23:12, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> It quacks suspiciously like a bug.
>
>
> Agreed
>
> What's more important is that is very publicly a bug in the eyes of others
> and should be fixed and backpatched soon.
>
> We have a maintenance release coming in a couple of weeks and I'd like to
> see this in there.

As I understand it, the approach I've taken here can't be backpatched
because it changes the aminsert_function interface (it needs the
current snapshot when inserting), so I was proposing this as an
improvement for 9.6. I guess there are other way to get the right
snapshot into btinsert (and thence _bt_check_unique), but I didn't
think it would be very classy to introduce a 'current snapshot' global
variable to smuggle it in.

> Let's set good standards for responsiveness and correctness.
>
>
> I'd also like to see some theory in comments and an explanation of why we're
> doing this (code).

Will do.

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2016-03-10 20:44:33 Re: pgsql: Provide much better wait information in pg_stat_activity.
Previous Message David G. Johnston 2016-03-10 20:20:08 Re: Add generate_series(date,date) and generate_series(date,date,integer)