Re: [HACKERS] 7.0.3(nofsync) vs 7.1

[Tom Lane]

"Mikheev, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, I've run simple test (below) to check this. Seems that 7.1
> is faster than 7.0.3 (nofsync), and that SELECT FOR UPDATE in RI
> triggers is quite bad for performance.
> Also, we should add new TODO item: implement dirty reads
> and use them in RI triggers.

That would fix RI triggers, I guess, but what about plain SELECT FOR
UPDATE being used by applications?

Why exactly is SELECT FOR UPDATE such a performance problem for 7.1,
anyway?  I wouldn't have thought it'd be a big deal...

                        regards, tom lane