| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Jim Nasby <jim(at)nasby(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze |
| Date: | 2013-12-20 19:17:19 |
| Message-ID: | 20131220191718.GD22570@eldon.alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas escribió:
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > I assume without checking that passing reloid/ctid would allow this to
> > work for tuples in a RETURNING clause; and if we ever have an OLD
> > reference for the RETURNING clause of an UPDATE, that it would work
> > there, too, showing the post-update status of the updated tuple.
>
> I don't understand what you're saying here. Are you saying that
> reloid/ctid is a better approach, a worse approach, or just a
> different approach?
That probably wasn't worded very well. I am just saying that whatever
approach we end up with, it would be nice that it worked somehow with
RETURNING clauses.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2013-12-20 19:33:52 | Re: shared memory message queues |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-12-20 19:15:00 | Re: patch: option --if-exists for pg_dump |