| From: | Shubham Barai <shubhambaraiss(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Borodin <amborodin86(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> |
| Subject: | Re: GSoC 2017 Proposal for predicate locking in hash index |
| Date: | 2017-06-22 17:32:03 |
| Message-ID: | CALxAEPtFvaZr9_6Ef1Jh7fbFqgPLvDFXnOs_MrLDckPRt+rxuA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 22 June 2017 at 21:12, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> Shubham Barai wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Now that hash index support write-ahead logging, it will be great if we
> add
> > support for predicate locking to it.
> > Implementation of predicate locking in hash index seems very simple.
> > I have already made changes in the code. I am currently working on
> testing.
>
> So if I understand correctly, this would only cause a false positive if
> two transactions have a rw/ww conflict in different tuples in the same
> bucket. Is that what we expect?
>
> Yes, I think so. Is there any way to further reduce false positives in
the same bucket?
Regards,
Shubham
<https://mailtrack.io/> Sent with Mailtrack
<https://mailtrack.io/install?source=signature&lang=en&referral=shubhambaraiss(at)gmail(dot)com&idSignature=22>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-06-22 17:33:56 | Re: possible self-deadlock window after bad ProcessStartupPacket |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2017-06-22 17:22:21 | Re: Beta 10 parser error for CREATE STATISTICS IF NOT EXISTS |