| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)svr1(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Rearrange pg_subtrans handling as |
| Date: | 2004-08-24 01:17:59 |
| Message-ID: | 412A9747.5060807@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Just random speculation, but could we use a pg_subtrans-like setup to do
row share locks?
ie. Store them in a sort of table to avoid the problems with limited
shared memory size?
Chris
Tom Lane wrote:
> Log Message:
> -----------
> Rearrange pg_subtrans handling as per recent discussion. pg_subtrans
> updates are no longer WAL-logged nor even fsync'd; we do not need to,
> since after a crash no old pg_subtrans data is needed again. We truncate
> pg_subtrans to RecentGlobalXmin at each checkpoint. slru.c's API is
> refactored a little bit to separate out the necessary decisions.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-08-24 03:02:01 | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Rearrange pg_subtrans handling as |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2004-08-24 00:06:52 | pgsql-server: Various minor improvements to the SGML documentation: fix |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Neil Conway | 2004-08-24 02:11:38 | compile warnings in HEAD |
| Previous Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-08-24 01:14:21 | Re: debuging postgres |