On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 3:54 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakan...@vmware.com> wrote: > Simon's approach would actually pass that test case just fine. It inserts > the (promise) index tuple first, and heap tuple only after that. It will > fail the test case with more than one unique index, however.
Oh, I see. Still, I don't think you need to UPDATE a uniquely-constrained attribute - even if updating constrained attributes is rare (dubious), non-HOT updates will have the same effect, no? I still think that's unacceptable. In any case, I still don't see what this buys us over the other two designs. What's the pay-off for giving up on the general avoidance of unprincipled deadlocks? -- Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
