Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2020-02-14 13:34:03 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I think the group locking + deadlock detection things are more
>> fundamental than you might be crediting, but I agree that having
>> parallel mechanisms has its own set of pitfalls.
> It's possible. But I'm also hesitant to believe that we'll not need
> other lock types that conflict between leader/worker, but that still
> need deadlock detection. The more work we want to parallelize, the more
> likely that imo will become.
Yeah. The concept that leader and workers can't conflict seems to me
to be dependent, in a very fundamental way, on the assumption that
we only need to parallelize read-only workloads. I don't think that's
going to have a long half-life.
regards, tom lane
