Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Data Bases > Pgsql Hackers > VirtualXactLock...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 1 of 6 Topic 9576 of 11013
Post > Topic >>

VirtualXactLockTableInsert

by simon@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Simon Riggs) Jun 27, 2008 at 11:06 AM

When we move from having a virtual xid to having a real xid I don't see
any attempt to re-arrange the lock queues. Surely if there are people
waiting on the virtual xid, they must be moved across to wait on the
actual xid? Otherwise the locking queue will not be respected because we
have two things on which people might queue. Anybody explain that?

In cases where we know we will assign a real xid, can we just skip the
assignment of the virtual xid completely? For example, where an implicit
transaction is started by a DML statement. Otherwise we have to wait for
2 lock table inserts, not just one.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com
 PostgreSQL Training, Services and Sup****t


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
 




 6 Posts in Topic:
VirtualXactLockTableInsert
simon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]   2008-06-27 11:06:57 
Re: VirtualXactLockTableInsert
fgp@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (&  2008-06-27 17:44:36 
Re: VirtualXactLockTableInsert
tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (T  2008-06-27 18:00:56 
Re: VirtualXactLockTableInsert
simon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]   2008-06-30 07:46:36 
Re: VirtualXactLockTableInsert
simon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]   2008-06-30 07:51:08 
Re: VirtualXactLockTableInsert
tgl@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (T  2008-06-30 10:55:47 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Fri Dec 5 8:57:57 CST 2008.