Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Overhead cost of Serializable Snapshot Isolation
Date: 2011-10-11 21:45:44
Message-ID: 201110112145.p9BLjiL15445@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> wrote:
>
> > That experience has taught me that backwards compatibility, while very
> > important in a lot of cases, has the potential to do just as much harm
> > if overdone.
>
> Agreed. Does my suggestion represent overdoing it? I ask for balance,
> not an extreme.

Well, balance is looking at what everyone else in the group is
suggesting, and realizing you might not have all the answers, and
listening. As far as I can see, you are the _only_ one who thinks it
needs an option. In that light, your suggestion seems extreme, not
balanced.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2011-10-11 22:07:04 Re: Formatting Curmudgeons WAS: MMAP Buffers
Previous Message Steve Singer 2011-10-11 21:44:34 Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby