Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions
> > I agree that we can make skip list a general data structure. But > > can we use the fixed-level skip list as a Plan B? Or a quick attempt > > before the general data structure ? > > Because I am not familiar with shared memory structure and tricks > > used in it, and I cannot estimate how much time it would take. > > It's not really too bad for fixed allocation shared memory, and I > can help with that. If I thought it would save much I could see > doing a prototype without generalization, but you would still have > most of the same shared memory issues, since the structure *must* > live in shared memory. > Thank you. If there is no other problem, I will submit the proposal. -- Mengxing Liu -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 11:17 PM, Mengxing Liu wrote: > Thanks, I've updated the proposal. Just one issue: > I agree that we can make skip list a general data structure. But > can we use the fixed-level skip list as a Plan B? Or a quick attempt > before the general data structure ? > Because I am not familiar with shared memory structure and tricks > used in it, and I cannot estimate how much time it would take. It's not really too bad for fixed allocation shared memory, and I can help with that. If I thought it would save much I could see doing a prototype without generalization, but you would still have most of the same shared memory issues, since the structure *must* live in shared memory. -- Kevin Grittner -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions
Thanks, I've updated the proposal. Just one issue: I agree that we can make skip list a general data structure. But can we use the fixed-level skip list as a Plan B? Or a quick attempt before the general data structure ? Because I am not familiar with shared memory structure and tricks used in it, and I cannot estimate how much time it would take. > -Original Messages- > From: "Kevin Grittner" > Sent Time: 2017-03-28 00:16:11 (Tuesday) > To: "Mengxing Liu" > Cc: "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate > O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions > > On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:24 PM, Mengxing Liu > wrote: > > > I've updated the proposal according to your comments. > > But I am still wondering that can you review it for a double-check > > to make sure I've made everything clear? > > Additional comments added. > > I'm afraid a few new issues came to mind reading it again. (Nothing > serious; just some points that could benefit from a little > elaboration.) > > -- > Kevin Grittner > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers -- Mengxing Liu -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions
On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:24 PM, Mengxing Liu wrote: > I've updated the proposal according to your comments. > But I am still wondering that can you review it for a double-check > to make sure I've made everything clear? Additional comments added. I'm afraid a few new issues came to mind reading it again. (Nothing serious; just some points that could benefit from a little elaboration.) -- Kevin Grittner -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions
Thanks for your time. I've updated the proposal according to your comments. But I am still wondering that can you review it for a double-check to make sure I've made everything clear? You can read my replies for reference. > -Original Messages- > From: "Kevin Grittner" > Sent Time: 2017-03-25 04:53:36 (Saturday) > To: "Mengxing Liu" > Cc: "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate > O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:24 AM, Mengxing Liu > wrote: > > > I've finished a draft proposal for "Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from > > rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions". > > I've attached some comments to the document; let me know if they > don't show up for you or you need clarification. > > Overall, if the comments are addressed, I think it is great. > > -- > Kevin Grittner -- Mengxing Liu -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:24 AM, Mengxing Liu wrote: > I've finished a draft proposal for "Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from > rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions". I've attached some comments to the document; let me know if they don't show up for you or you need clarification. Overall, if the comments are addressed, I think it is great. -- Kevin Grittner -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions
On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 2:24 AM, Mengxing Liu wrote: > I've finished a draft proposal for "Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from > rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions". You can find > it from GSOC website or by the link below. > https://docs.google.com/document/d/17TAs3EJIokwPU7UTUmnlVY3ElB-VHViyX1zkQJmrD1A/edit?usp=sharing > > I was wondering if you have time to review the proposal and give me some > comments? Will take a look and give you an initial review in a day or two. -- Kevin Grittner -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Re: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals / Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions
Hi, Kevin. I've finished a draft proposal for "Eliminate O(N^2) scaling from rw-conflict tracking in serializable transactions". You can find it from GSOC website or by the link below. https://docs.google.com/document/d/17TAs3EJIokwPU7UTUmnlVY3ElB-VHViyX1zkQJmrD1A/edit?usp=sharing I was wondering if you have time to review the proposal and give me some comments? > -Original Messages- > From: "Kevin Grittner" > Sent Time: 2017-03-17 21:57:18 (Friday) > To: "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" > Cc: > Subject: [HACKERS] Guidelines for GSoC student proposals > > I've found various sources that give hints about what a student > proposal should look like, but nothing I could just give as a link, > so I pulled together what I could find, tempered by my own ideas and > opinions. I suggest that we send the below, or something like it to > each student who expresses interest in making a proposal, or who > submits a proposal that doesn't meet the below guidelines. Thoughts > or suggestions for changes before we do? Remember, time is short, > so this cannot be a 200 message bike-shedding debate -- we just need > to provide some sort of guidance to students in a timely way, with > the timeline being: > > February 27 - March 20 > Potential student participants discuss application ideas with > mentoring organizations > March 20 16:00 UTC > Student application period opens > April 3 16:00 UTC > Student application deadline > > Each GSoC student proposal should be a PDF file of 6 to 8 pages. In > the end, Google will publish these documents on a web page, so the > student should make each proposal something which they will be happy > to have future potential employers review. > > Some ideas for desirable content: > > - A resume or CV of the student, including any prior GSoC work > - Their reasons for wanting to participate > - What else they have planned for the summer, and what their time > commitment to the GSoC work will be > - A clear statement that there will be no intellectual property > problems with the work they will be doing -- that the PostgreSQL > community will be able to use their work without encumbrances > (e.g., there should be no agreements related to prior or > ongoing work which might assign the rights to the work they do > to someone else) > - A description of what they will do, and how > - Milestones with dates > - What they consider to be the test that they have successfully > completed the project > > Note that a student proposal is supposed to be far more detailed > than the ideas for projects provided by the organization -- those > are intended to be ideas for what the student might write up as a > proposal, not ready-to-go proposal documents. > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers -- Mengxing Liu -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
