From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
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 01:02:15 |
Message-ID: | 200709052102.15463.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Wednesday 05 September 2007 18:40, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> writes:
> > I'm trying to decide how reasonable the use case is. We have transactions
> > that run several hours long, often touching a number of tables, and I've
> > used the transaction to get a list of all of the relations a given
> > transaction is touching. This makes the above solution more annoying by
> > far, but I don't do it often, and I think I generally use the pid to get
> > that information anyway; if I used prepared transactions I'm sure I'd
> > feel stronger about this.
>
> 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. Again, I not sure the use case
is reasonable, but it's there. If no one else feels strongly, let's document
a query to mimic the old column and move on.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | John DeSoi | 2007-09-06 01:04:43 | Re: Has anyone tried out the PL/pgSQL debugger? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-09-05 22:40:26 | Re: [PATCHES] Lazy xid assignment V4 |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2007-09-06 03:10:12 | Re: HOT patch - version 15 |
Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-09-05 22:59:15 | Re: HOT patch - version 15 |