Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Simon Riggs
Тема Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11
Дата
Msg-id CANP8+j+f-=5_1HPLgag8FPFrdJPKgMmMr0s=cFH1DzZqsPcZ5g@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: [HACKERS] MERGE SQL Statement for PG11  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On 26 March 2018 at 16:09, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 5:53 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>> Since we now have MVCC catalog scans, all the name lookups are
>> performed using the same snapshot so in the above scenario the newly
>> created object would be invisible to the second name lookup.
>
> That's not true, because each lookup would be performed using a new
> snapshot -- not all under one snapshot.

You're saying we take a separate snapshot for each table we lookup?
Sounds weird to me.

So this error could happen in SELECT, UPDATE, DELETE or INSERT as well.

Or you see this as something related specifically to MERGE, if so how?
Please explain what you see.

-- 
Simon Riggs                http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Vladimir Sitnikov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Proposal: http2 wire format
Следующее
От: Vladimir Sitnikov
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Proposal: http2 wire format