Re: GetCurrentVirtualXIDs()

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: GetCurrentVirtualXIDs()
Date: 2009-04-04 10:03:46
Message-ID: 1238839426.5444.265.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 18:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:

> So on third thought I think the patch logic is sound; but I think that
> as documentation we had better add another bool parameter to
> GetCurrentVirtualXIDs indicating whether it's okay to ignore procs
> with xmin = 0.

That sounds better through being more explicit. I didn't consider
whether the patched function was true in all cases, only that it looked
correct in the current usage. Another lesson in future-proofing code.

Thanks also for the clear proof.

--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Teodor Sigaev 2009-04-04 10:09:24 Re: Review: B-Tree emulation for GIN
Previous Message shrish purohit 2009-04-04 07:36:10 Extension of Thick Indexes