Re: Reducing Catalog Locking

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Reducing Catalog Locking
Date: 2014-10-31 14:02:28
Message-ID: 29957.1414764148@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> On 2014-10-31 09:48:52 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> But more to the point, this seems like optimizing pg_dump startup by
>> adding overhead everywhere else, which doesn't really sound like a
>> great tradeoff to me.

> Well, it'd finally make pg_dump "correct" under concurrent DDL. That's
> quite a worthwile thing.

I lack adequate caffeine at the moment, so explain to me how this adds
any guarantees whatsoever? It sounded like only a performance
optimization from here.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-10-31 14:07:20 Re: tracking commit timestamps
Previous Message Merlin Moncure 2014-10-31 14:00:52 Re: tracking commit timestamps