On 12/18/2013 11:04 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 12/18/2013 02:45 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
On 2013-12-18 16:39:58 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andres Freund wrote:
It would only force serialization for transactions that modify tables
covered by the assert, that doesn't seem to bad. Anything covered by an
assert shoulnd't be modified frequently, otherwise you'll run into
major
performance problems.
Well, as presented there is no way (for the system) to tell which tables
are covered by an assertion, is there? That's my point.
Well, the patch's syntax seems to only allow to directly specify a SQL
query to check - we could iterate over the querytree to gather all
related tables and reject any function we do not understand.
Umm, that's really a major limitation in utility.
The query can be "SELECT is_my_assertion_true()", and the function can
do anything.
- Heikki
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
