| From: | Thomas Munro <munro(at)ip9(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | SKIP LOCKED DATA (work in progress) |
| Date: | 2014-05-13 23:06:20 |
| Message-ID: | CADLWmXUvd5Z+cFczi6Zj1WcTrXzipgP-wj0pZOWSaRUy=F0omQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi
A couple of years ago I posted an outline of a plan [1] and an
initial patch [2] for implementing SKIP LOCKED DATA. I have
recently come back to this idea, rebased the patch and added a
simple isolation test -- please see attached.
However, heap_lock_tuple is clearly not for the faint hearted,
and I freely admit that I don't understand half of the things
going on in there yet. My general approach has been to follow
the example set by NOWAIT, generalising that flag into a 3-way
policy... but of course NOWAIT doesn't have to worry about
cleaning anything up, because it uses ereport, hence my TODOs.
As always, I would be grateful for any feedback.
Thanks!
Thomas Munro
[1]
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CADLWmXV7inA-HS=bJ-s6+Ai8DsVGx8zMohr0Ht38EWmXNeqPWw@mail.gmail.com
[2]
http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CADLWmXUUjmrPU-+9ss7BCATxM-hr6__9mB6Wv7ry3-r+KXGgBw@mail.gmail.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| skip-locked-data-v3.patch | text/x-patch | 43.3 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Craig Ringer | 2014-05-13 23:23:35 | Re: SKIP LOCKED DATA (work in progress) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2014-05-13 22:58:11 | gettimeofday is at the end of its usefulness? |