From: | "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Jan Wieck" <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com> |
Cc: | "PostgreSQL Development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: Snapshot cloning |
Date: | 2007-01-26 12:25:47 |
Message-ID: | 1169814348.3772.308.camel@silverbirch.site |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 2007-01-25 at 22:19 -0500, Jan Wieck wrote:
> The idea is to clone an existing serializable transactions snapshot
> visibility information from one backend to another. The semantics would
> be like this:
>
> backend1: start transaction;
> backend1: set transaction isolation level serializable;
> backend1: select pg_backend_pid();
> backend1: select publish_snapshot(); -- will block
Great idea. It can also be used by pg_dump to publish its snapshot so
that we can make VACUUM continue to process effectively while it pg_dump
is running.
Two questions:
- why does it have to block? I don't see any reason - the first process
can begin doing useful work. The second process might fail or itself be
blocked by something.
- why just serializable snapshots?
--
Simon Riggs
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-01-26 13:06:52 | Re: Proposal: Snapshot cloning |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2007-01-26 12:11:10 | Re: crash on 8.2 and cvshead - failed to add item to the |