From: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas(at)vmware(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Problems with approach #2 to value locking (INSERT ... ON CONFLICT UPDATE/IGNORE patch) |
Date: | 2015-01-04 08:14:19 |
Message-ID: | CAM3SWZTRVfmVBJptCUpZSFydso8WJvWTaMZSv+UFmfqpoeu=Vw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 10:16 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
> I looked at the code in more detail, and realized that there were old
> bugs in the exclusion constraint related modifications. I attach a
> delta patch that fixes them. This is a combined patch that is all that
> is needed to apply on top of v1.8.vallock2.tar.gz [1] to have all
> available bugfixes.
I've updated Jeff Janes' test suite to support testing of exclusion
constraints that are equivalent to unique indexes:
https://github.com/petergeoghegan/jjanes_upsert/commit/a941f423e9500b847b1a9d1805ba52cb11db0ae9
(This requires a quick hack to the Postgres source code to accept
exclusion constraints as ON CONFLICT UPDATE arbiters).
So far, everything seems okay with exclusion constraints, as far as I
can determine using the stress tests that we have. This is an
encouraging sign.
--
Peter Geoghegan
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2015-01-04 17:18:31 | addRangeTableEntry() relies on pstate, contrary to its documentation |
Previous Message | Noah Misch | 2015-01-04 06:38:58 | Re: Small doc patch about pg_service.conf |