Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation
Date: 2011-10-11 21:26:56
Message-ID: CA+U5nMJY1rverLx=QN=ZfZg1AVRFAuCeMgkHg7himVMXbc8hPw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:00 PM, Kevin Grittner
<Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> "You'll have to retest your apps" just isn't a good answer
>
> For which major PostgreSQL releases have you recommended that people
> deploy their apps without retesting?

None. People don't always follow my advice, regrettably. They ask
comparative questions like "What is the risk of upgrade?", "How much
testing is required?"

I never met a customer yet that has an automated test suite designed
to stress the accuracy of results under concurrent workloads, so the
inability to control the way a new feature operates makes such
questions more likely to be given an answer that indicates greater
effort and higher risk. That is exactly what I personally would wish
to avoid.

An off switch encourages people to use new features. It is not a
punishment or an admonition to the developer.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Florian Pflug 2011-10-11 21:30:32 Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation
Previous Message Tom Lane 2011-10-11 21:22:10 Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation