Greg Stark <st...@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > how much would it suck to find your big data load abort after 10 > hours loading data? And how much if it didn't wasn't even selecting > data which your data load conflicted with. That's certainly a fair question. The prototype implementation of the technique gave preference to aborting the "pivot" transaction, which by definition has both read data modified by another transaction and written data read by another transaction; so as you haven't read other data, you would be safe in the particular case you cite. They did mention that it might be desirable to use some other bias, such as the transaction with the earlier start time or which has a higher value for some "work accomplished" metric. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
