| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] log session end - again |
| Date: | 2004-02-03 03:31:40 |
| Message-ID: | 10833.1075779100@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Also, Andrew, on your other patch for log_session_info line, Magnus had
>> the idea of giving each session an id based on the first transaction of
>> the session.
> I did think about using a cluster-wide sequence, if we can make such a
> thing (might also be useful for system generated UIDs too).
Not a good idea IMHO. If you do that, then there will be no such thing
as a purely read-only transaction, because *every* transaction will
include a nextval() call. That means even read-only transactions cannot
commit till the disk spins.
If we want a unique id for transient purposes like logging, then make
some kind of counter in shared memory. Don't use a sequence, it's much
too heavyweight.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-03 03:45:22 | Re: 7.5 change documentation |
| Previous Message | scott.marlowe | 2004-02-03 01:07:29 | Re: Idea about better configuration options for sort memory |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-03 04:26:17 | Re: fix memcpy() overlap |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-02-03 02:27:46 | Re: Fix memcmp() with different sizes. |