Re: [HACKERS] Large Objects versus transactional behavior

2011-05-13 Thread YAMAMOTO Takashi
hi, On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote: This is related to the SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock thread, but seemed different enough to merit spinning off a new thread. Our shop hasn't used large objects so far because of the lack of

Re: [HACKERS] Large Objects versus transactional behavior

2011-05-12 Thread Kevin Grittner
YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote: is there any chance to just make large objects obey the normal semantics in future? I sure hope so, but I have no idea how hard that is. I feel the same about TRUNCATE TABLE now that I recognize the semantic difference between it and DELETE FROM with no WHERE

Re: [HACKERS] Large Objects versus transactional behavior

2011-05-06 Thread Robert Haas
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov wrote: This is related to the SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock thread, but seemed different enough to merit spinning off a new thread. Our shop hasn't used large objects so far because of the lack of security

[HACKERS] Large Objects versus transactional behavior

2011-04-30 Thread Kevin Grittner
This is related to the SIREAD lock versus ACCESS EXCLUSIVE lock thread, but seemed different enough to merit spinning off a new thread. Our shop hasn't used large objects so far because of the lack of security (until 9.1), so I never noticed the rather unusual transactional semantics of large