From: Csaba Nagy <nagy@ecircle-ag.com>
To: Carlos Moreno <moreno_pg@mochima.com>
Cc: postgres performance list <pgsql-performance@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Insert performance
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 17:02:24 +0100
Message-ID: <1173196944.9058.25.camel@coppola.muc.ecircle.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <45ED8EFD.5030908@mochima.com>
References: <1172596221.393824.41130@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com>
<45ED1996.7050008@archonet.com>
<1173167607.4917.8.camel@hatman>
<45ED217D.30404@archonet.com>
<1173172748.4917.23.camel@hatman>
<45ED37D1.3000503@archonet.com>
<45ED8EFD.5030908@mochima.com>
I only know to answer your no. 2:
> 2) What about the issue with excessive locking for foreign keys when
> inside a transaction? Has that issue disappeared in 8.2? And if not,
> would it affect similarly in the case of multiple-row inserts?
The exclusive lock is gone already starting with 8.0 IIRC, a
non-exclusive lock on the parent row is used instead. Thing is that this
is still too strong ;-)
The proper lock would be one which only prevents modification of the
parent key, other updates would be safe on the same row.
In any case, the current behavior is much better than what was before.
Cheers,
Csaba.
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-performance@postgresql.org
Cc: nagy@ecircle-ag.com, moreno_pg@mochima.com
Subject: Re: Insert performance
In-Reply-To: <1173196944.9058.25.camel@coppola.muc.ecircle.de>
* 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