Thanks, I've updated the proposal. Just one issue: I agree that we can make skip list a general data structure. But can we use the fixed-level skip list as a Plan B? Or a quick attempt before the general data structure ? Because I am not familiar with shared memory structure and tricks used in it, and I cannot estimate how much time it would take.
> -----Original Messages----- > From: "Kevin Grittner" <kgri...@gmail.com> > Sent Time: 2017-03-28 00:16:11 (Tuesday) > To: "Mengxing Liu" <liu-m...@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn> > Cc: "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org> > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate > O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions > > On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:24 PM, Mengxing Liu > <liu-m...@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn> wrote: > > > I've updated the proposal according to your comments. > > But I am still wondering that can you review it for a double-check > > to make sure I've made everything clear? > > Additional comments added. > > I'm afraid a few new issues came to mind reading it again. (Nothing > serious; just some points that could benefit from a little > elaboration.) > > -- > Kevin Grittner > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers -- Mengxing Liu -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
