On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Andres Freund <and...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > You've proposed an framework and algorithm for something I'd really, really > like to see. I don't think that it can work explicitly as you proposed, so I > roughly sketched out a solution I can see. > I don't want "my" idea to win, I want a idea to win. I haven't fleshed out my > idea to the point where I would consider it something ready to implement or > something. > You're the patch author here whose plans are laid open to be scrutinized ;). > If you think my idea has merit, use and adapt it to reality. If not, find > another, better, solution. > > Even if our path to that goal is confrontational at times, the goal is to > find a good solution, not the argument itself.
Totally agreed. > I haven't argued about INSERT ... DUPLICATE LOCK because the page locking > scheme doesn't seem to work out for plain DUPLICATE. No need to think/argue > about the fancier version in that case. Check. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
