From: | "Inoue, Hiroshi" <h-inoue(at)dream(dot)email(dot)ne(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Hiroshi Saito <hiroshi(at)winpg(dot)jp> |
Subject: | Re: Removal of currtid()/currtid2() and some table AM cleanup |
Date: | 2020-06-05 13:25:00 |
Message-ID: | 3415859b-f2c0-849e-8423-6e3b848cca7b@dream.email.ne.jp |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020/06/05 15:22, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 10:10:21PM +0900, Inoue, Hiroshi wrote:
>> On 2020/06/03 11:14, Michael Paquier wrote:
>>> I have been looking at the ODBC driver and the need for currtid() as
>>> well as currtid2(), and as mentioned already in [1], matching with my
>>> lookup of things, these are actually not needed by the driver as long
>>> as we connect to a server newer than 8.2 able to support RETURNING.
>> Though currtid2() is necessary even for servers which support RETURNING,
>> I don't object to remove it.
> In which cases is it getting used then?
Keyset-driven cursors always detect changes made by other applications
(and themselves). currtid() is necessary to detect the changes.
CTIDs are changed by updates unfortunately.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
> From what I can see there is
> zero coverage for that part in the tests. And based on a rough read
> of the code, this would get called with LATEST_TUPLE_LOAD being set,
> where there is some kind of bulk deletion involved. Couldn't that be
> a problem?
> --
> Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2020-06-05 13:25:26 | Re: significant slowdown of HashAggregate between 9.6 and 10 |
Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2020-06-05 13:04:31 | Re: SIGSEGV from START_REPLICATION 0/XXXXXXX in XLogSendPhysical () at walsender.c:2762 |