| From: | "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Robert Haas" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | <nicolas(dot)barbier(at)gmail(dot)com>,<gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at> |
| Subject: | Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking |
| Date: | 2010-01-13 22:38:48 |
| Message-ID: | 4B4DF718020000250002E487@gw.wicourts.gov |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> wrote:
> This is the milestone of having full serializable behavior, albeit
> with horrible performance, using the simplest implementation
> possible.
A tad too simple, as it turns out. It did it's main job of
providing a simple milestone to identify code organization and lock
points, but I'd have to jigger some things to make S2PL work with
snapshot isolation which aren't needed for SSI. So, for those
keeping score, I'm moving on down the checklist to get to the SSI
implementation, rather than futzing with code which would just be
thrown away.
No need for anyone to test for full serializable behavior.
Comments on technique welcome.
-Kevin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2010-01-13 22:40:55 | Re: per-user pg_service.conf |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2010-01-13 22:20:40 | Re: Serializable Isolation without blocking |