On 2016-08-31 12:56:45 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> I was thinking that nextval could grab a shared buffer lock and release
> immediately, just to ensure no one holds exclusive buffer lock
> concurrently (which would be used for things like dropping one seq tuple
> from the page, when a sequence is dropped); then control access to each
> sequence tuple using LockDatabaseObject.  This is a HW lock, heavier
> than a buffer's LWLock, but it seems better than wasting a full 8kb for
> each sequence.

That's going to go be a *lot* slower, I don't think that's ok.  I've a
hard time worrying about the space waste here; especially considering
where we're coming from.


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

Reply via email to