On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Not so. The extra locking would only occur on the first lock > acquisition after DDL operations occur. If that was common then your > other performance patch would not be an effective optimisation. There > is no additional locking from what I've proposed in the common code > path - that's why we have a relcache.
The extra locking would also occur when *initially* building relcache entries. In other words, this would increase - likely quite significantly - the overhead of backend startup. It's not going to be sufficient to do this just for pg_class; I think you'll have to do it for pg_attribute, pg_attrdef, pg_constraint, pg_index, pg_trigger, pg_rewrite, and maybe a few others I'm not thinking of right now. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
