Re: Consider pipeline implicit transaction as a transaction block

From: Anthonin Bonnefoy <anthonin(dot)bonnefoy(at)datadoghq(dot)com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Consider pipeline implicit transaction as a transaction block
Date: 2024-11-28 07:53:09
Message-ID: CAO6_XqqsmS2m6vaid3ZXjJ8H8UHsCo2a1f7rpea_wLdcn91raw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:26 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> I don't mind being more careful here based on your concerns, so I'll
> go remove that in the stable branches.

Sorry about that. I didn't have a strong need for this to be
backpatched and should have made this clearer.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) 2024-11-28 07:59:21 RE: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2024-11-28 07:50:32 Re: Remove useless casts to (void *)