| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Satoshi Nagayasu <nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] read-only database |
| Date: | 2005-05-09 00:23:16 |
| Message-ID: | 14790.1115598196@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Satoshi Nagayasu <nagayasus(at)nttdata(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> I think the read-only has two meanings for the user.
> First is the internal state. XID, OID or something like that.
> In these cases, the internal state mustn't be changed.
> Some users will need the read-only for internal state.
> Second is read-only for the user data contents.
> In some cases, the user want to make the user data as read-only.
> For this purpose, the user doesn't care XID or OID, I guess.
> So, we can implement them in different way.
> I think both are necessary.
Indeed, but we already have a implementation of the second form, in
a reasonably spec-compliant fashion. The TODO item concerns the first
form, which is something that the current system cannot do at all.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-05-09 00:48:01 | Re: [HACKERS] read-only database |
| Previous Message | John Hansen | 2005-05-09 00:11:45 | Re: Patch for collation using ICU |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-05-09 00:48:01 | Re: [HACKERS] read-only database |
| Previous Message | Satoshi Nagayasu | 2005-05-09 00:02:07 | Re: [HACKERS] read-only database |