From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: serializable read only deferrable |
Date: | 2010-12-08 18:32:16 |
Message-ID: | 18498.1291833136@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> Attached.
> Accomplished more through mimicry (based on setting transaction
> isolation level) than profound understanding of the code involved;
> but it passes all regression tests on both `make check` and `make
> installcheck-world`. This includes a new regression test that an
> attempt to change it after a query fails. I've poked at it with
> various ad hoc tests, and it is behaving as expected in those.
Hmm. This patch disallows the case of creating a read-only
subtransaction of a read-write parent. That's a step backwards.
I'm not sure how we could enforce that the property not change
after the first query of a subxact, but maybe we don't care that much?
Do your optimizations pay attention to local read-only in a subxact?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Chris Browne | 2010-12-08 18:37:44 | Re: unlogged tables |
Previous Message | Jan Urbański | 2010-12-08 18:02:35 | Re: Solving sudoku using SQL |