| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: parallel mode and parallel contexts |
| Date: | 2015-02-11 19:03:18 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaHqNmzw1yD+yvXMnEbuLRMTFvH2DXNMo9jCQv3saBhXw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I'm not sure what you mean by the "severity" of the lock. How about
> marking the locks that the worker inherited from the parallel master
> and throwing an error if it tries to lock one of those objects in a
> mode that it does not already hold? That'd probably catch a sizeable
> number of programming errors without tripping up many legitimate use
> cases (and we can always relax or modify the prohibition if it later
> turns out to be problematic).
Or maybe do that only when the new lock mode is stronger than one it
already holds.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Wong | 2015-02-11 19:14:42 | Re: ibm system z in the buildfarm |
| Previous Message | Jeff Janes | 2015-02-11 19:00:46 | Re: pgbench -f and vacuum |