On Thu, 1 Dec 2022 15:48:21 +0900
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 05:29:58PM +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> > Thank you for your review. I agree that an isolation test is required.
> > The attached patch contains the test using the scenario as explained in
> > the previous post.
>
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 05:29:58PM +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> Thank you for your review. I agree that an isolation test is required.
> The attached patch contains the test using the scenario as explained in
> the previous post.
Cool, thanks. Sorry for my late reply here. I have put my head on
t
Hello Micheal-san,
On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 17:02:06 +0900
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 10:12:13AM +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> > Thank you for comment. Do you think it can be marked as Ready for Commiter?
>
> Matviews have been discarded from needing predicate locks since
> 3bf3a
On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 10:12:13AM +0900, Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> Thank you for comment. Do you think it can be marked as Ready for Commiter?
Matviews have been discarded from needing predicate locks since
3bf3ab8 and their introduction, where there was no concurrent flavor
of refresh yet. Shouldn't
On Fri, 9 Sep 2022 16:27:45 +0530
Dilip Kumar wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 3:31 PM Richard Guo wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 3:44 PM Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> >>
> >> If such two transactions run concurrently, a write skew anomaly occurs,
> >> and the result of order_summary refresh
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 3:31 PM Richard Guo wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 3:44 PM Yugo NAGATA wrote:
>>
>> If such two transactions run concurrently, a write skew anomaly occurs,
>> and the result of order_summary refreshed in T1 will not contain the
>> record inserted in T2.
Yes we do ha
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 3:44 PM Yugo NAGATA wrote:
> If such two transactions run concurrently, a write skew anomaly occurs,
> and the result of order_summary refreshed in T1 will not contain the
> record inserted in T2.
Indeed we have write skew anomaly here between the two transactions.
> O
Hi,
I propose to acquire SI-read predicate locks on materialized views
as the attached patch.
Currently, materialized views do not participate in predicate locking,
but I think this causes a serialization anomaly when `REFRESH
MATERIALIZED VIEW CONCURRENTLY` is used.
For example, supporse that
