From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <munro(at)ip9(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: SKIP LOCKED DATA |
Date: | 2012-01-16 08:51:45 |
Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJ0EzNaJB70t-wgyJmunXh4dY_GBHfRc8cg_Yg82TH34Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 5:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Thomas Munro <munro(at)ip9(dot)org> writes:
>> I am wondering out loud whether I am brave enough to try to propose
>> SKIP LOCKED DATA support and would be grateful for any feedback and/or
>> {en|dis}couragement. I don't see it on the todo list, and didn't find
>> signs of others working on this (did I miss something?), but there are
>> examples of users asking for this feature (by various names) on the
>> mailing lists. Has the idea already been rejected, is it
>> fundamentally infeasible for some glaring reason, or far too
>> complicated for new players?
>
> It sounds to me like "silently give the wrong answers". Are you sure
> there are not better, more deterministic ways to solve your problem?
The name is misleading.
It means "open a cursor on a query, when you fetch if you see a locked
row return quickly from the fetch".
The idea is that if its locked it is still being written and therefore
not interesting (yet).
Sounds reasonable request.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Smith | 2012-01-16 09:57:46 | CommitFest 2012-01 kick-off |
Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2012-01-16 08:51:21 | Re: logging in high performance systems. |