| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] Lazy xid assignment V4 |
| Date: | 2007-09-06 04:56:21 |
| Message-ID: | 12856.1189054581@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> On Wednesday 05 September 2007 18:40, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't see why you wouldn't start using the VXID for this purpose?
> I'm not sure either :-) Though, it would be nice to have an easy way to see
> which transactions actually modified tables.
Moving the goal posts, aren't we? It was not possible to find that out
at all from the pg_locks view before. (Well, you could guess based on
the type of table locks held, but you were only guessing.)
As of CVS HEAD you *can* determine that from pg_locks, to high
probability anyway, by looking to see which VXIDs have transaction IDs
locked.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2007-09-06 08:19:57 | Re: left outer join vs subplan |
| Previous Message | Greg Smith | 2007-09-06 03:31:56 | Just-in-time Background Writer Patch+Test Results |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-09-06 06:20:48 | Re: HOT patch - version 15 |
| Previous Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2007-09-06 03:10:12 | Re: HOT patch - version 15 |