Re: [CORE] FOR SHARE vs FOR UPDATE locks

Josh Berkus wrote:
> Tom,
>
> > So at this point we are facing three options:
> > ????????- throw in a large and poorly tested "fix" at the last moment;
> > ????????- postpone 8.2 until we can think of a real fix, which might
> > ???????? ?be a major undertaking;
> > ????????- ship 8.2 with the same behavior 8.0 and 8.1 had.
> > None of these are very attractive, but I'm starting to think the last
> > is the least bad.
>
> Yes. If it was earlier in the beta cycle I'd say no, but frankly this
> behavior has existed for two years without examples of real-life data
> loss. Further, the TPC tests, which are supposed to give ACID properties
> a workout, would not break this, so the industry doesn't consider it very
> important either.
>
> So, I think it needs to go on the list for 8.2.1 or 8.3 (depending on what
> changes the fix requires) but I don't think we should hold up the release.

We cannot add something this major in a minor release --- it would have
to be 8.3.

--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +