From: | Joe Wildish <joe-postgresql(dot)com(at)elusive(dot)cx> |
---|---|
To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Implementing SQL ASSERTION |
Date: | 2015-05-03 09:24:46 |
Message-ID: | 90CE3FAB-3E26-4CC3-9C7B-0822A92D16AA@elusive.cx |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> On 3 May 2015, at 02:42, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 02, 2015 at 10:42:24PM +0100, Joe Wildish wrote:
>>
>> I may start writing up on a blog of where I get to, and then post further to this list, if there is interest.
>
> I suspect that you would get a lot further with a PoC patch including
> the needed documentation. Remember to include how this would work at
> all the transaction isolation levels and combinations of same that we
> support. Recall also to include the lock strength needed. Just about
> anything can be done with a database-wide lock :)
Thanks David. I’m obviously new here so I not that familiar with how one starts contributing.
Once I get to a decent level with the EM4 PoC I will post the details to this list. The general idea is that upon assertion creation, the expression is analysed to determine when it needs to be validated — corresponding internal "after statement” triggers are then created. There will definitely need to be some serialisation take place on the basis of when an assertion has been validated, but I’ve not got that far yet. I’ll be sure to include the details when I post though.
Regards.
-Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vladimir Borodin | 2015-05-03 09:27:29 | Re: Improving replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM records |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2015-05-03 02:15:40 | Re: Make more portable TAP tests of initdb |