Re: true serializability and predicate locking

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>,<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
Subject: Re: true serializability and predicate locking
Date: 2010-01-07 21:09:21
Message-ID: 4B45F921020000250002DF4D@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> thinking that fudging the tuple cost GUCs is going to work seems
> unrealistically optimistic. If you need the optimizer to know
> about this, you need the optimizer to REALLY know about this...

I rule nothing out. If you have a more refined idea, I welcome you
to include in the wiki's "R&D Issues" section. Or describe it here
and I'll add it. Frankly, it seemed no more of a hack than some
aspects of our costing calculations, but it obviously pays to model
it as well as we can. But I will take something which shows any
improvement without getting too nasty, until we have something
better. I see the optimization phase as lasting a while and trying
out many ideas, some of which won't turn out to have been good ones.
We don't use those.

-Kevin

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2010-01-07 21:15:55 Re: 8.5alpha3 hot standby crash report (DatabasePath related?)
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2010-01-07 21:08:45 Re: Streaming replication and postmaster signaling