On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 4:47 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> OK, I kept only the small comment change from that little fixup patch,
> and pushed this.
>
> > I had proposed as alternative way in initial email and also later,
> > didn't receive comment on that, so re-posting.
>
> > typedef bool (*AMCheckF
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 7:27 PM Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 8:21 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
>> but on another read-through of the main patch
>> I didn't like the comments for CheckForSerializableConflictOut() or
>> the fact that it checks SerializationNeededForRead() again, after
On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 8:21 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> I pushed the first two,
Thank You!
but on another read-through of the main patch
> I didn't like the comments for CheckForSerializableConflictOut() or
> the fact that it checks SerializationNeededForRead() again, after I
> thought a bit abo
On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 8:41 AM Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 8:44 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
>> I'm planning to commit these three patches on Monday. I've attached
>> versions with whitespace-only changes from pgindent, and commit
>> messages lightly massaged and updated to point to
On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 8:44 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 6:53 AM Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> >>> - I wonder if CheckForSerializableConflictOutNeeded() shouldn't have a
> >>> portion of it's code as a static inline. In particular, it's a shame
> >>> that we currently perform ex
On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 6:53 AM Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
>>> - I wonder if CheckForSerializableConflictOutNeeded() shouldn't have a
>>> portion of it's code as a static inline. In particular, it's a shame
>>> that we currently perform external function calls at quite the
>>> frequency when seria
On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 4:56 PM Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 2:06 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>
>> Looking at the code as of master, we currently have:
>>
>
> Super awesome feedback and insights, thank you!
>
> - PredicateLockTuple() calls SubTransGetTopmostTransaction() to figur
On 06/08/2019 13:35, Thomas Munro wrote:
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 9:26 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
Attached is a patch that contains your fix.txt with the changes for
clarity mentioned above, and an isolationtester test case.
LGTM.
Pushed, thanks!
- Heikki
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 9:26 PM Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> I had some steam, and wrote a spec that reproduces this bug. It wasn't
> actually that hard to reproduce, fortunately. Or unfortunately; people
> might well be hitting it in production. I used the "freezetest.spec"
> from the 2013 thread a
On 06/08/2019 07:20, Thomas Munro wrote:
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 4:35 AM Andres Freund wrote:
On 2019-08-05 20:58:05 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
1. Commit dafaa3efb75 "Implement genuine serializable isolation
level." (2011) locked the root tuple, because it set t_self to *tid.
Possibly due to c
Hello Thomas,
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 9:50 AM Thomas Munro wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 4:35 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > On 2019-08-05 20:58:05 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > > 1. Commit dafaa3efb75 "Implement genuine serializable isolation
> > > level." (2011) locked the root tuple, becaus
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 4:35 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-08-05 20:58:05 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > 1. Commit dafaa3efb75 "Implement genuine serializable isolation
> > level." (2011) locked the root tuple, because it set t_self to *tid.
> > Possibly due to confusion about the effect of th
Hi,
On 2019-08-05 20:58:05 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 11:56 AM Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 2:06 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> >> I'm also a bit confused why we don't need to pass in the offset of the
> >> current tuple, rather than the HOT root tuple
On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 11:56 AM Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 2:06 PM Andres Freund wrote:
>> I'm also a bit confused why we don't need to pass in the offset of the
>> current tuple, rather than the HOT root tuple here. That's not related
>> to this patch. But aren't we lock
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 2:06 PM Andres Freund wrote:
> Looking at the code as of master, we currently have:
>
Super awesome feedback and insights, thank you!
- PredicateLockTuple() calls SubTransGetTopmostTransaction() to figure
> out a whether the tuple has been locked by the current
> tra
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 2:36 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I think the only part its doing for sub-transaction is
> > > > SubTransGetTopmostTransaction(xid). If xid passed to this function is
> > > > already top most transaction which is case for zheap and zedstore, then
> > > > there is
Hi,
On 2019-07-31 12:37:58 -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:55 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2019-07-31 10:42:50 -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 2:58 PM Thomas Munro
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:02 AM Andres
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 12:37 PM Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:55 AM Andres Freund wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2019-07-31 10:42:50 -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 2:58 PM Thomas Munro
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:02 AM Andres Freu
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:55 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2019-07-31 10:42:50 -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 2:58 PM Thomas Munro
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:02 AM Andres Freund
> wrote:
> > > > > - CheckForSerializableConflictOut() no more ta
Hi,
On 2019-07-31 10:42:50 -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 2:58 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:02 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > > - CheckForSerializableConflictOut() no more takes HeapTuple nor
> > > > buffer, instead just takes xid. Push heap sp
Hi,
On 2019-07-31 09:57:58 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:02 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > Hm. I wonder if we somehow ought to generalize the granularity scheme
> > for predicate locks to not be tuple/page/relation. But even if, that's
> > probably a separate patch.
>
> W
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 2:58 PM Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:02 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> > > - CheckForSerializableConflictOut() no more takes HeapTuple nor
> > > buffer, instead just takes xid. Push heap specific parts from
> > > CheckForSerializableConflictOut() into it
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:02 AM Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2019-06-24 10:41:06 -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> > Proposing following changes to make predicate locking and checking
> > functions generic and remove dependency on HeapTuple and Heap AM. We
> > made these changes to help with Zedstore. I
Hi,
On 2019-06-24 10:41:06 -0700, Ashwin Agrawal wrote:
> Proposing following changes to make predicate locking and checking
> functions generic and remove dependency on HeapTuple and Heap AM. We
> made these changes to help with Zedstore. I think the changes should
> help Zheap and other AMs in g
Proposing following changes to make predicate locking and checking
functions generic and remove dependency on HeapTuple and Heap AM. We
made these changes to help with Zedstore. I think the changes should
help Zheap and other AMs in general.
- Change PredicateLockTuple() to PredicateLockTID(). So,
25 matches
Mail list logo
