From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> |
Cc: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: why do we need two snapshots per query? |
Date: | 2011-12-13 20:30:07 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYpRvPoKw_WffUQCjugU+a_g7GVPaLSBxUb9xyMTxmVyQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Dimitri Fontaine
<dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr> wrote:
>> + /* Done with the snapshot used for parameter I/O and parsing/planning */
>> + if (snapshot_set)
>> + PopActiveSnapshot();
>
> This comment needs adjusting.
I thought about adjusting it, but I didn't see what it made sense to
adjust it to. It still is the parameter used for parameter I/O and
parsing/planning, so the existing text isn't wrong. It will possibly
also get reused for execution, but the previous statement has a
lengthy comment on that, so it didn't seem worth recapitulating here.
> You need to be editing the comments for this function. To be specific
> you didn't update this text:
>
> * The caller can optionally pass a snapshot to be used; pass InvalidSnapshot
> * for the normal behavior of setting a new snapshot. This parameter is
> * presently ignored for non-PORTAL_ONE_SELECT portals (it's only intended
> * to be used for cursors).
Actually, I did, but the change was in the second patch file attached
to the same email, which maybe you missed? Combined patch attached.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
fewer-snapshots.patch | application/octet-stream | 6.1 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2011-12-13 20:33:28 | Re: JSON for PG 9.2 |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2011-12-13 20:27:03 | Re: JSON for PG 9.2 |