On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 10:17 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Any objections to that plan? None at all, but some questions. This overhaul of the cache mechanism has been extensive, so you're now very well placed to answer related questions. As you know, I've been trying to reduce the lock strength of some DDL operations. When that was last discussed there were two "options". The first was to re-write SnapshotNow, which in my opinion is necessary but solves only part of the problem. I proposed explicit locking around catalog access, which would affect the cache path/code. I don't like that, but I don't see another way. From where you are now, do have any insight about how to tackle the locking problem? Thanks. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
