On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Amit Kapila
wrote:
> >> After thinking about these cases for a bit, I came up with a new
> >> possible approach to this problem. Suppose that, at the beginning of
> >> parallelism, when we decide to start up
On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 8:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Amit Kapila
wrote:
> > Won't this be addressed because both updates issued from myfunc()
> > are considered as separate commands, so w.r.t lock it should behave
> > as 2 different updates in same transaction.
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 8:53 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> Won't this be addressed because both updates issued from myfunc()
> are considered as separate commands, so w.r.t lock it should behave
> as 2 different updates in same transaction. I think there may be more
> things to make updates possible v
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> Discussion of my incomplete group locking patch seems to have
> converged around two points: (1) Everybody agrees that undetected
> deadlocks are unacceptable. (2) Nobody agrees with my proposal to
> treat locks held by group members as mutu
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> Note that you'd definitely not want to do this naively - currently
> there's baked in assumptions into the vaccum code that only one backend
> is doing parts of it.
>
> I think there's
Did something you intended get left out here?
>> 4. Pa
Hi,
On 2014-11-13 15:59:11 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> Discussion of my incomplete group locking patch seems to have
> converged around two points: (1) Everybody agrees that undetected
> deadlocks are unacceptable. (2) Nobody agrees with my proposal to
> treat locks held by group members as mutua
Discussion of my incomplete group locking patch seems to have
converged around two points: (1) Everybody agrees that undetected
deadlocks are unacceptable. (2) Nobody agrees with my proposal to
treat locks held by group members as mutually non-conflicting. As was
probably evident from the emails
