| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: New hooks for snapshot and transaction ID acquisition from external source |
| Date: | 2013-02-23 11:06:54 |
| Message-ID: | 25426.1361617614@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> What do you think about adding hooks for transaction ID and snapshot
> acquisition?
Not much. Those places are not only hot spots but remarkably delicate.
It's hard to see much that a plugin could do there that wouldn't be
pretty deleterious to both performance and reliability. As an example,
throwing an error in either place is dangerous, and taking any locks
they don't already take even more so.
Now of course, if your plugin breaks your database that's maybe not my
problem, but I'm concerned that even just adding a test to see if
there's a hook to call could result in measurable slowdown.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-02-23 12:37:34 | Re: bugfix: --echo-hidden is not supported by \sf statements |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2013-02-23 10:55:54 | Re: bugfix: --echo-hidden is not supported by \sf statements |