From: | "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM> |
---|---|
To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | RE: AW: AW: Re: Backup and Recovery |
Date: | 2001-07-06 15:54:27 |
Message-ID: | 3705826352029646A3E91C53F7189E320166AD@sectorbase2.sectorbase.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Good point. We'd have to recognize btree splits (and possibly some
> other operations) as things that must be done anyway, even if their
> originating transaction is aborted.
>
> There already is a mechanism for doing that: xlog entries can
> be written without any transaction identifier (see XLOG_NO_TRAN).
> Seems to me that btree split XLOG records should be getting written
> that way now --- Vadim, don't you agree?
We would have to write two records per split instead of one as now.
Another way is new xlog AM method: we have XXX_redo, XXX_undo (unfunctional)
and XXX_desc (for debug output) now - add XXX_compact (or whatever)
able to modify record somehow for BAR. For heap, etc this method could
be {return} (or NULL) and for btree it could remove inserted tuple
from record (for aborted TX).
Vadim
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2001-07-06 16:02:04 | Re: Vacuum and Transactions |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2001-07-06 15:45:17 | Re: Vacuum and Transactions |