From: | Joseph S <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: doc patch for savepoints |
Date: | 2006-11-28 02:01:16 |
Message-ID: | 456B986C.2010407@selectacast.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Joseph Shraibman <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net> writes:
>> + <para>
>> + Savepoints use shared memory. If you use many savepoints without
>> releasing them, you
>> + will run out of shared memory and you may see an error like this in
>> your log:
>
> I do not see the point of this. Shall we put equivalent disclaimers
> into every single construct that consumes shared memory? There is no
> such paragraph under LOCK TABLE, for example.
>
Because one is unlikely to lock so many tables that they run out of
shared memory. On the other hand if someone does like I did, which is
in a loop:
SAVEPOINT ;
UPDATE;
and does not realize that SAVEPOINT uses shared memory they can get
themselves in trouble.
You don't have to have the error message example, but I really think
some sort of message is needed. Right now it is not clear that
savepoints use shared memory at all. A user might assume they just
exist on the disk somehow, or in regular nonshared memory.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joseph S | 2006-11-28 02:08:21 | Re: doc patch for savepoints |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-11-28 01:39:13 | Re: Integrating Replication into Core |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joseph S | 2006-11-28 02:08:21 | Re: doc patch for savepoints |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2006-11-27 23:27:00 | Re: doc patch for savepoints |