| From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Julien Tachoires <julmon(at)gmail(dot)com>, Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>, Japin Li <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SUBTRANS: Minimizing calls to SubTransSetParent() |
| Date: | 2022-11-29 18:35:24 |
| Message-ID: | 20221129183524.i53bkjhr3vxxu3re@awork3.anarazel.de |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On 2022-11-29 13:30:02 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I still wonder whether we'll regret losing information about the
> subtransaction tree structure, as discussed in the other thread [1].
> That seems like the main barrier to proceeding with this.
Yea, this has me worried. I suspect that we have a bunch of places relying on
this. I'm not at all convinced that optimizing XidInMVCCSnapshot() is a good
reason for this structural change, given that there's other possible ways to
optimize (e.g. my proposal to add overflowed subxids to the Snapshot during
lookup when there's space).
Greetings,
Andres Freund
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2022-11-29 18:44:03 | Re: SUBTRANS: Minimizing calls to SubTransSetParent() |
| Previous Message | vignesh C | 2022-11-29 18:31:49 | Re: Support logical replication of DDLs |