| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < |
| Date: | 2016-04-13 03:05:30 |
| Message-ID: | 20160413030530.dfldqhmtojo222c4@alap3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
On 2016-04-12 23:52:14 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > I'm kinda inclined to apply that portion (or just the whole patch with
> > the spurious #ifdef 0 et al fixed) into 9.6; and add the necessary
> > checks in a few places. Because I really think this is likely to hit
> > unsuspecting users.
>
> !!!
>
> Be sure to consult with the RMT before doing anything of the sort.
I didn't plan to do anything without a few +1's. I don't think we can
release with the state of things as is though. I don't see a less
intrusive way than to get rid of that spinlock on all platforms capable
of significant concurrency.
So, RMT, what are your thoughts on this?
Andres
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-04-13 07:54:04 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Add regression tests for multiple synchronous standbys. |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-04-13 02:52:14 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-04-13 03:39:00 | Re: raw output from copy |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2016-04-13 02:52:14 | Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Avoid extra locks in GetSnapshotData if old_snapshot_threshold < |