From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Savepoints |
Date: | 2002-01-24 01:20:58 |
Message-ID: | 200201240120.g0O1Kwm26748@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > There is no reason for other backend to be able to see savepoint undo
> > information, and keeping it private greatly simplifies the
> > implementation.
>
> Yes... and requires additional memory/disk space: we keep old records
> in data files and we'll store them again...
>
> How about: use overwriting smgr + put old records into rollback
> segments - RS - (you have to keep them somewhere till TX's running
> anyway) + use WAL only as REDO log (RS will be used to rollback TX'
> changes and WAL will be used for RS/data files recovery).
> Something like what Oracle does.
I am sorry. I see what you are saying now. I missed the words
"overwriting smgr". You are suggesting going to an overwriting storage
manager. Is this to be done only because of savepoints. Doesn't seem
worth it when I have a possible solution without such a drastic change.
Also, overwriting storage manager will require MVCC to read through
there to get accurate MVCC visibility, right?
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2002-01-24 01:22:26 | Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-01-24 01:08:45 | Re: Savepoints |