On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> The business about not throwing a serialization failure due to actions > of our own xact does seem worth fixing now, but if I understand correctly, > we can deal with that by adding a test for xmin-is-our-own-xact into > the existing code structure. I propose doing that much (and adding > Munro's regression test case) and calling it good for today. Thanks. This is the only part of it that I consider an actual *bug* (since you can retry the serialization failure forever and never move on because there is no other transaction involved which can finish to clear the problem) as opposed to an opportunity to optimize (by reducing false positive serialization failures actually involving other transactions). I never saw anything in the literature addressing the intersection of UPSERT and SSI, and I think we do need to think about and discuss this a bit more before we can be sure of the best fix. This is probably not thread on which to have that discussion. -- Kevin Grittner EDB: 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
