On 12/18/2013 02:45 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-12-18 16:39:58 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
It would only force serialization for transactions that modify tables
covered by the assert, that doesn't seem to bad. Anything covered by an
assert shoulnd't be modified frequently, otherwise you'll run into major
performance problems.
Well, as presented there is no way (for the system) to tell which tables
are covered by an assertion, is there?  That's my point.
Well, the patch's syntax seems to only allow to directly specify a SQL
query to check - we could iterate over the querytree to gather all
related tables and reject any function we do not understand.


Umm, that's really a major limitation in utility. We need to come up with a better answer than this, which would essentially hobble the facility.

cheers

andrew



--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to