Re: SerializableSnapshot removed from postgresql 8.4

From: Duarte Fonseca <dfonseca(at)identitynetworks(dot)com>
To: Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SerializableSnapshot removed from postgresql 8.4
Date: 2011-07-14 08:57:40
Message-ID: 6B6ACDB1-73E6-4224-912F-EFFEF28B8BE6@identitynetworks.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Thanks Jeff, that seems to have done it.

We are still evaluating the move to 8.4 and have no plans to move on to 9.x at the moment but I'll keep those changes in mind.

cheers,

On 13 Jul 2011, at 19:33, Jeff Davis wrote:

> On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 18:10 +0100, Duarte Fonseca wrote:
>> Hi list,
>>
>> I'm currently upgrading from Postgresql 8.1 to 8.4 one of the steps of the process for me involves compiling the replication toolkit we use against 8.4.
>>
>> I've just run into a problem since this replication code references SerializableSnapshot which as been removed in 8.4, i was wondering what should our code use instead, I found a thread[1] in the hackers mailing list where GetActiveSnapshot() was recommended, i would greatly appreciate it if someone could point me in the right direction on this.
>>
>>
>> The code in question goes something like:
>>
>> if (SerializableSnapshot == NULL)
>> elog(ERROR, "SerializableSnapshot is NULL ");
>>
>> // Return the minxid from the current snapshot
>> PG_RETURN_TRANSACTIONID(SerializableSnapshot->xmin);
>
> I believe that equivalent code in 8.4 would look something like:
>
> if (!IsXactIsoLevelSerializable || !ActiveSnapshotSet())
> elog(ERROR, "Could not find serializable snapshot");
>
> PG_RETURN_TRANSACTIONID(GetActiveSnpashot()->xmin);
>
>
> However, be careful! Some of this code changes again in 9.1. In 9.1, you
> probably want to look for the "repeatable read" transaction.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
>
>

Duarte Fonseca
dfonseca(at)identitynetworks(dot)com

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tony Wang 2011-07-14 10:20:28 Re: Weird problem that enormous locks
Previous Message Radoslaw Smogura 2011-07-14 07:36:31 Re: Weird problem that enormous locks