Horton

Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-12-14T15:36:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Try to avoid running with a full fsync request queue.

Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 06:36:21PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Yeah, I've been wondering about this: do we have a problem already with
>> exclusion constraints?  I mean, if a concurrent inserter doesn't see the
>> tuple that we've marked here as deleted while we toast it, it could
>> result in a violated constraint, right?  I haven't built a test case to
>> prove it.

> Does the enforcement code for exclusion constraints differ significantly from
> the ordinary unique constraint code?

It's an entirely separate code path (involving an AFTER trigger).  I
don't know if there's a problem, but Alvaro's right to worry that it
might behave differently.

			regards, tom lane