| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Egor Rogov <e(dot)rogov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: FrozenTransactionId |
| Date: | 2016-09-06 20:41:39 |
| Message-ID: | 18782.1473194499@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-docs |
Egor Rogov <e(dot)rogov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> writes:
> Right, it does not say that FrozenTransactionId is what appears on disk,
> but what is? There is no such information anywhere in the doc. Since 9.4
> frozen transactions have their normal XIDs preserved, so how a user can
> tell normal transaction from frozen one? This is what needs to be
> explained, I believe.
I'm afraid the answer is "you can't tell". The infomask bits in tuple
headers aren't exposed via SQL. If you're really desperate,
contrib/pageinspect would help, but I don't propose mentioning that here.
In general, I'm not really sure why users would care very much at
a tuple-by-tuple level. Aggregate statistics would be interesting,
which raises the question why contrib/pgstattuple doesn't provide
frozen-tuples counts.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2016-09-06 21:52:37 | Re: FrozenTransactionId |
| Previous Message | Egor Rogov | 2016-09-06 20:15:53 | Re: FrozenTransactionId |