Hi, On 2019-07-31 09:57:58 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 6:02 AM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > > Hm. I wonder if we somehow ought to generalize the granularity scheme > > for predicate locks to not be tuple/page/relation. But even if, that's > > probably a separate patch. > > What do you have in mind?
My concern is that continuing to inferring the granularity levels from the tid doesn't seem like a great path forward. An AMs use of tids might not necessarily be very amenable to that, if the mapping isn't actually block based. > Perhaps you just want to give those things different labels, "TID > range" instead of page, for the benefit of "logical" TID users? > Perhaps you want to permit more levels? That seems premature as long > as TIDs are defined in terms of blocks and offsets, so this stuff is > reflected all over the source tree... I'm mostly wondering if the different levels shouldn't be computed outside of predicate.c. Greetings, Andres Freund