Re: SSI work for 9.1

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: "Dan Ports" <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu>,<pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: SSI work for 9.1
Date: 2011-06-14 14:57:57
Message-ID: 4DF730A5020000250003E5A5@gw.wicourts.gov
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:

> I did some further changes, refactoring SkipSerialization so that
> it's hopefully more readable, and added a comment about the
> side-effects. See attached. Let me know if I'm missing something.

I do think the changes improve readability. I don't see anything
missing, but there's something we can drop. Now that you've split
the read and write tests, this part can be dropped from the
SerializationNeededForWrite function:

+
+ /* Check if we have just become "RO-safe". */
+ if (SxactIsROSafe(MySerializableXact))
+ {
+ ReleasePredicateLocks(false);
+ return false;
+ }

If it's doing a write, it can't be a read-only transaction....

-Kevin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-06-14 15:03:42 Re: ITYM DROP TABLE
Previous Message Cédric Villemain 2011-06-14 14:52:45 Re: Re: patch review : Add ability to constrain backend temporary file space