Re: C based plugins, clocks, locks, and configuration variables

From: Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Clifford Hammerschmidt <tanglebones(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: C based plugins, clocks, locks, and configuration variables
Date: 2016-11-10 00:19:00
Message-ID: CAMsr+YGxMbG3=xEF7By1yW5pwWgud5bLKgwb4gkMOBduWef+=A@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 10 November 2016 at 07:18, Clifford Hammerschmidt
<tanglebones(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> wrote:
>>
>> 2ndQuadrant/bdr
>
>
> That is similar. I'm not clear on the usage of OID for sequence
> (`DirectFunctionCall1(nextval_oid, seqoid)`) ... does that imply a lock
> around a sequence generation? also different is that your sequence doesn't
> reset on the time basis, it ascends and wraps independently of the time.

Meant to explain more here.

Most of the system identifies sequence relations by oid. All this does
is call nextval. By accepting and passing oid we reduce the number of
syscache/relcache lookups and memory allocations required to call
nextval vs calling it by name. That's about all, really.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2016-11-10 00:21:37 Re: Is user_catalog_table sensible for matviews?
Previous Message Craig Ringer 2016-11-10 00:17:11 Re: C based plugins, clocks, locks, and configuration variables