| From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again |
| Date: | 2009-04-22 19:53:15 |
| Message-ID: | 1240429995.2119.102.camel@jd-laptop.pragmaticzealot.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2009-04-22 at 15:49 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> I wrote:
> Warning about very old prepared transactions is something that we
> could think about doing as well; it doesn't have to be either-or.
> I think the need for it would decrease quite a bit if they weren't
> enabled by default, though.
>
> Comments? Anyone seriously opposed to making the default be zero?
I am not opposed to making the default zero. I am also +1 on adding the
warnings.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
PostgreSQL - XMPP: jdrake(at)jabber(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Consulting, Development, Support, Training
503-667-4564 - http://www.commandprompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company, serving since 1997
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-04-22 20:26:49 | Re: Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2009-04-22 19:51:17 | Re: The last WAL segment of the old timeline is not archived for a while after archive recovery |