| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "<Markus Wanner" <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, "<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: User-facing aspects of serializable transactions |
| Date: | 2009-06-04 16:16:50 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f070906040916o6c3582c9x1e14be14f3b22cec@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> I was going to try to scare up some resources to advance this if we
> could get to some consensus. I don't get the feeling we're there yet.
> Suggestions welcome.
I think I might've said this before, but I think you need to do (or
get someone with knowledge of the code to do) more looking at the lock
bookkeeping that's required to make the SIREAD stuff work and try to
figure out if it's even feasible for PostgreSQL and what the
performance costs would be (an idea of how much code complexity this
would introduce would be good too). A lot of the "lack of consensus"
at this point looks to me more like "lack of being sure whether this
can actually work". I don't know that we're going to get any closer
to consensus without some less-handwavy answer to that question.
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-06-04 16:23:53 | Re: It's June 1; do you know where your release is? |
| Previous Message | Kolb, Harald (NSN - DE/Munich) | 2009-06-04 16:02:00 | postmaster recovery and automatic restart suppression |