Re: SI-read predicate locks on materialized views
Yugo Nagata <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
From: Yugo NAGATA <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut@gmail.com>, Richard Guo
<guofenglinux@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL-development
<pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2022-10-18T08:29:58Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
Hello Micheal-san, On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 17:02:06 +0900 Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 10:12:13AM +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote: > > Thank you for comment. Do you think it can be marked as Ready for Commiter? > > Matviews have been discarded from needing predicate locks since > 3bf3ab8 and their introduction, where there was no concurrent flavor > of refresh yet. Shouldn't this patch have at least an isolation test > to show the difference in terms of read-write conflicts with some > serializable transactions and REFRESH CONCURRENTLY? Thank you for your review. I agree that an isolation test is required. The attached patch contains the test using the scenario as explained in the previous post. Regards, Yugo Nagata -- Yugo NAGATA <nagata@sraoss.co.jp>
Commits
-
Make materialized views participate in predicate locking
- 43351557d0d2 16.0 landed