| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Concurrent MERGE |
| Date: | 2010-08-05 15:43:34 |
| Message-ID: | 1281023014.1838.922.camel@ebony |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Looks like MERGE is progressing well.
At 2010 Dev Mtg, we put me down to work on making merge work
concurrently. That was garbled slightly and had me down as working on
predicate locking which is the general solution to the problem.
Do we still need me to work on concurrent MERGE, or is that included in
the current MERGE patch (can't see it), or is that covered elsewhere
(for example Kevin Grittner's recent work)?
Still happy to do work as proposed, just checking still required.
Thanks,
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-05 15:47:02 | Re: string_agg delimiter having no effect with order by |
| Previous Message | Nicolas Barbier | 2010-08-05 15:43:22 | Re: Online backup cause boot failure, anyone know why? |