pg.ddx.io  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org mailing list archive  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Pavan Deolasee <pavan.deolasee@gmail.com>
Cc: amul sul <sulamul@gmail.com>
Cc: Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE of partition key
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2018 12:03:59 -0500
Message-ID: <8293.1520528639@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+Tgmob5gn1oKCjBUu8t7Go4h_AZfN5yy22N_Jv0OK8advJoWA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAJ_b95PkwojoYfz0bzXU8OokcTVGzN6vYGCNVUukeUDrnF3dw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+TgmoYY98AEjh7RDtuzaLC--_0smCozXRu6bFmZTaX5Ne=B5Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAJ_b94mc5jhgyPpG2RqJkKTxcgCrkg-6P-Ms2gPTxcctXB53g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA4eK1LQS6TmsGaEwR9HgF-9TZTHxrdAELuX6wOZBDbbjOfDjQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAJ_b95izaDNQGTO=46AQnuQ10qvvAoSqNBicmZ9eosq2-gmjA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA4eK1LB0bAv4rADwoQSvb7u8evAvVNnume4dqjk_6C5YNajTw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAJ_b95Nc72DGGJk-_RBeNLq5P0OFQz+pMR4Z_xBDNbwy8kj3w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20180111143641.GJ2416@tamriel.snowman.net>
	<CAAJ_b96UMma8VUMtvqDzEWUFObfbNXAc-9c4GvAQ2kSwCKURww@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA4eK1LHVnNWYF53F1gUGx6CTxuvznozvU-Lr-dfE=Qeu1gEcg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAJ_b95R4i-+4VevSYEg1HdT+Zq6v5BuZ1zD14-yzpxe+kioqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA4eK1LrOf+ZGkjMbiL7GjvFXoQ_O+XPyXHTL-L5yhd+WU4NWQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAJ_b97w_GGV-k4ErxWTpz5sAgFJ4aUYMx0khfySvANmWRzsag@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA4eK1Kn7EgUdnFnp0d+Jk7Chf88qsyzNBDfJ8OJsMGpKuX4mA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAJ_b94rtTW+J-_NH0V_q13SXLyMt0d1NS! j+SAh439j3c-wPmA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAA4eK1KtsTqsGDggDCrz2O9Jgo7ma-Co-B8+v3L2zWMA2NHm6A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAJ_b95GpE7Qh+17zY-d5p5xPfqcTSY5ppEiYyeGTmoPaw=zXQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABOikdPXwqkLGgTZZm2qYwTn4L69V36rCh55fFma1fAYbon7Vg@mail.gmail.com>
	<10896.1520521635@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<CA+Tgmob5gn1oKCjBUu8t7Go4h_AZfN5yy22N_Jv0OK8advJoWA@mail.gmail.com>

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Therefore, the only options are (1) ignore the problem, and let a
> cross-partition update look entirely like a delete+insert, (2) try to
> throw some error in the case where this introduces user-visible
> anomalies that wouldn't be visible otherwise, or (3) revert update
> tuple routing entirely.  I voted for (1), but the consensus was (2).

FWIW, I would also vote for (1), especially if the only way to do (2)
is stuff as outright scary as this.  I would far rather have (3) than
this, because IMO, what we are looking at right now is going to make
the fallout from multixacts look like a pleasant day at the beach.

			regards, tom lane




view thread (84+ messages)  latest in thread

Message-ID: <8293.1520528639@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink:  ../8293.1520528639@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on:    postgresql.org/message-id/8293.1520528639@sss.pgh.pa.us

 · 

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
  Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, pavan.deolasee@gmail.com, sulamul@gmail.com, amit.kapila16@gmail.com, sfrost@snowman.net
  Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE of partition key
  In-Reply-To: <8293.1520528639@sss.pgh.pa.us>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox