Re: why do we need two snapshots per query?

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: why do we need two snapshots per query?
Date: 2011-11-13 07:47:06
Message-ID: CA+U5nMKBCnjB4HY5npvW_XFfNFLTAZjoKDoVOMRL0viU6YfqOA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
>> Tom, in that earlier thread you said you'd be doing something in this
>> release about that. Can you say more about what that was, and will you
>> be doing it still?
>
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=commitdiff&h=e6faf910d75027bdce7cd0f2033db4e912592bcc
>
> I think that largely supersedes what I understood your notion of a
> one-shot plan to be about, though perhaps I missed something?

I was looking at other use cases, specifically partitioning/partial indexes.

If we could be certain that a query was being executed immediately
then it would be possible to simplify expressions using stable
functions as if they were constants. My earlier patch did exactly
that.

--
 Simon Riggs                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2011-11-13 08:13:03 Re: Avoiding shutdown checkpoint at failover
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2011-11-13 01:56:18 Re: pg_restore --no-post-data and --post-data-only