Re: So, why shouldn't SET CONSTRAINTS set a transaction snapshot?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: So, why shouldn't SET CONSTRAINTS set a transaction snapshot?
Date: 2008-12-12 22:51:39
Message-ID: 20081212225139.GN3806@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

> 1. Always set a snapshot for SET CONSTRAINTS. This is a minus-one-liner
> --- just remove it from the exclusion list in PortalRunUtility.
>
> 2. Have it set a snapshot only if it finds pending trigger events to
> fire. This would only require another half dozen lines of code, but
> it's certainly more complicated than choice #1.

It seems to me there is room for a backwards compatibility argument
here. How about doing #2 for 8.3 and back, and #1 for 8.4?

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Markus Wanner 2008-12-12 23:00:07 Re: Sync Rep: First Thoughts on Code
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-12-12 22:27:30 Re: So, why shouldn't SET CONSTRAINTS set a transaction snapshot?