| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Amit Kapila <akapila(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers <pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pgsql: Add a new GUC and a reloption to enable inserts in parallel-mode |
| Date: | 2021-03-29 19:13:36 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaWMC8QF3gm0Uj8A-G6MrCd5APO9ew4F+HKe1HOmmjUWA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers |
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 6:01 AM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> A naive question about this scheme: What if the worker that acquires
> the XID writes some row and another worker reads that row before it
> gets to see the XID information? I think it won't treat such a row is
> written by its own transaction. Won't such a scheme lead to different
> behavior than serial inserts or where we have acquired XID before
> starting parallel-operation?
Well, this is the sort of thing that somebody would need to analyze as
part of implementing something like this, but off hand I don't quite
see what the problem is.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2021-03-29 19:29:42 | Re: pgsql: Add a new GUC and a reloption to enable inserts in parallel-mode |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2021-03-29 16:07:32 | pgsql: Clean up date_part tests a bit |