> 12 марта 2018 г., в 1:54, Alexander Korotkov <a.korot...@postgrespro.ru> 
> написал(а):
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 8:30 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> 
> wrote:
> I suggest to create a new function GinPredicateLockPage() that checks
> whether fast update is enabled for the index.  The current arrangement
> looks too repetitive and it seems easy to make a mistake.
> BTW, should we also skip CheckForSerializableConflictIn() when
> fast update is enabled?  AFAICS, now it doesn't cause any errors or
> false positives, but makes useless load.  Is it correct?
BTW to BTW. I think we should check pending list size with 
GinGetPendingListCleanupSize() here
+       /*
+        * If fast update is enabled, we acquire a predicate lock on the entire
+        * relation as fast update postpones the insertion of tuples into index
+        * structure due to which we can't detect rw conflicts.
+        */
+       if (GinGetUseFastUpdate(ginstate->index))
+               PredicateLockRelation(ginstate->index, snapshot);

Because we can alter alter index set (fastupdate = off), but there still will 
be pending list.

We were discussing this with Shubham back in July, chosen some approach that 
seemed better, but I can't remember what was that...

Best regards, Andrey Borodin.

Reply via email to