| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, testperf-general(at)pgfoundry(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [Testperf-general] Re: ExclusiveLock |
| Date: | 2004-11-18 22:43:26 |
| Message-ID: | 1100817806.4113.10444.camel@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2004-11-18 at 22:12, Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> writes:
> > Aside from foriegn keys, though, is there any way in which INSERT page locks
> > could block other inserts?
>
> Not for longer than the time needed to physically add a tuple to a page.
The main problem on INSERTs is that it is usually the same few pages:
the lead data block and the lead index block. There are ways of
spreading the load out across an index, but I'm not sure what happens on
the leading edge of the data relation, but I think it hits the same
block each time.
Only an issue if you have more than one CPU...
--
Best Regards, Simon Riggs
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-11-18 22:50:59 | Re: [Testperf-general] Re: ExclusiveLock |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-11-18 22:27:12 | Re: OpenBSD/Sparc status |