From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-core(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [CORE] FOR SHARE vs FOR UPDATE locks |
Date: | 2006-12-01 18:55:05 |
Message-ID: | 200612011055.06368.josh@agliodbs.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-docs pgsql-hackers |
Tom,
> So at this point we are facing three options:
> - throw in a large and poorly tested "fix" at the last moment;
> - postpone 8.2 until we can think of a real fix, which might
> be a major undertaking;
> - ship 8.2 with the same behavior 8.0 and 8.1 had.
> None of these are very attractive, but I'm starting to think the last
> is the least bad.
Yes. If it was earlier in the beta cycle I'd say no, but frankly this
behavior has existed for two years without examples of real-life data
loss. Further, the TPC tests, which are supposed to give ACID properties
a workout, would not break this, so the industry doesn't consider it very
important either.
So, I think it needs to go on the list for 8.2.1 or 8.3 (depending on what
changes the fix requires) but I don't think we should hold up the release.
As PR maven, though, you know I'm biased about the release date.
I would suggest a last-minute doc patch documenting the behavior and
suggesting that locks should always be declared in the outer transaction
prior to any savepoints.
--
--Josh
Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-01 19:02:13 | Re: [CORE] FOR SHARE vs FOR UPDATE locks |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-12-01 18:54:38 | Re: FOR SHARE vs FOR UPDATE locks |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-12-01 19:02:13 | Re: [CORE] FOR SHARE vs FOR UPDATE locks |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-12-01 18:54:38 | Re: FOR SHARE vs FOR UPDATE locks |