| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Width of SubTransactionId (hello Postgres PRO) |
| Date: | 2021-10-28 14:37:08 |
| Message-ID: | 20211028143708.GA25366@momjian.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 10:29:52AM -0400, Chapman Flack wrote:
> Hi,
>
> According to a reported PL/Java issue [0], SubTransactionId in
> Postgres PRO EE 13 has become a typedef uint64 rather than uint32.
>
> What are the plans for this type upstream? I notice it is still uint32
> here, even for 14. Are there plans for it to become uint64 at some point?
> Or to become something else entirely?
>
> I am deliberating whether I should just make the Java type 64 bits and say
> "thereifixedit", or if some other approach would be more futureproof.
I know of no plans to implement 64-bit transaction ids in community
Postgres because of the longer tuple header and file format changes.
It is discussed occasionally though.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2021-10-28 14:50:59 | Re: Replication & recovery_min_apply_delay |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2021-10-28 14:31:13 | Re: [PATCH] Proposal for HIDDEN/INVISIBLE column |