On 2013-09-18 00:54:38 -0500, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > At some point we might to extend that logic to more cases, but that > > should be separate discussion imo. > > This is essentially why I went and added a row locking component over > your objections.
I didn't object to implementing row level locking. I said that if your basic algorithm without row level locks is viewn as being broken, it won't be fixed by implementing row level locking. What I meant here is just that we shouldn't implement a mode with less waiting for now even if there might be usecases because that will open another can of worms. Greetings, Andres Freund -- Andres Freund 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
