Horton

Re: [HACKERS] GSoC 2017: weekly progress reports (week 6)

Shubham Barai <shubhambaraiss@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Shubham Barai <shubhambaraiss@gmail.com>
To: Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm@yandex-team.ru>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Andrew Borodin <amborodin86@gmail.com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn@gmail.com>
Date: 2018-03-16T12:10:54Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Attachments

On 16 March 2018 at 03:57, Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>
wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 3:25 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>>
>> > And what happen if somebody concurrently set (fastupdate = on)?
>> > Can we miss conflicts because of that?
>>
>> I think it'd be better to have that option require AccessExclusive lock,
>> so that it can never be changed concurrently with readers.  Seems to me
>> that penalizing every single read to cope with this case would be a bad
>> trade-off.
>
>
> As Andrey Borodin mentioned, we already do.  Sorry for buzz :)
>
>
>
I have updated the patch based on suggestions.

Regards,
Shubham

Commits

  1. Re-think predicate locking on GIN indexes.

  2. Predicate locking in GIN index