n Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Please explain in detail your idea of how it will work.
> So we will take some kind of lock, which will stop such a happening. ... > May be someone can come up with better ideas than this. With respect, I don't call this a detailed explanation of an idea. For consideration here, come up with a very detailed design of how your suggestion will work. Think about it carefully, spend hours and days thinking it through and when you are personally sure it is better than what we have now, please raise it on list at an appropriate time. Bear in mind that most people throw away 90% of their ideas before even mentioning them here. I hope that helps you to contribute. At the moment we're trying to review patches for specific code to include or exclude, not discuss huge redesign of internal mechanisms using broad brush descriptions. It is possible you may find an improvement and if you do, people will be interested but that seems an unlikely thing to happen here and now. If you have specific comments or tests on this patch those are very welcome. -- 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
