Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> Moving on from that, I have proposed other solutions. Koichi, Jignesh
> and and then Robert have shown measurements of the huge contention in
> this area of our software. Robert's patch addresses the problems, as
> do Koichi's and my latest patch. I would like to see us do
> *something* about these problems for 9.1. Not all of them are risky or
> time consuming.
In the first place, all of these issues predate 9.1 by years. They are
not regressions or new bugs, and they have not suddenly gotten more
urgent. In the second place, I haven't seen any proposals in the area
that appear low risk. I seriously doubt that I would consider *any*
meaningful change in the locking area to be low risk.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
