Re: argtype_inherit() is dead code

From: Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>
To: Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: argtype_inherit() is dead code
Date: 2005-04-17 23:54:23
Message-ID: 200504171954.23949.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sunday 17 April 2005 19:30, Rod Taylor wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-04-17 at 14:04 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 06:56:01AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > > From a "people who call me" perspective. I am never asked about
> > > inheritance. Most of the people don't even know it is there.
> > > The requests I get are:
> >
> > Just wondering, does anybody asks you about the excessive locking (and
> > deadlocking) on foreign keys? The business about being able to drop
> > users and then find out they were still owners of something? I guess I
> > worry about things too low-level that nobody really cares too much about.
>
> I know of plenty of people impacted by foreign key locking that remove
> specific keys in production that they have in place for testing.
>

That or put calls into try/catch mechanisms "just in case" it deadlocks even
though it wouldn't with some less restrictive locking mechanism. Or come up
with some type of serializing scheme to ensure deadlocks can't happen. Or
several other bad schemes.... Alvaro, there are many pints waiting for you
from a great many postgresql users if you can eliminate this problem with the
work you're doing on shared row locks.

--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rod Taylor 2005-04-18 00:15:29 Re: argtype_inherit() is dead code
Previous Message Rod Taylor 2005-04-17 23:30:08 Re: argtype_inherit() is dead code