Re: Questions related to xlog

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005, Tom Lane wrote:

>
> Yeah, the non-transaction-controlled distinction is really not very
> useful. I believe Vadim put it in originally because he wanted to go to
> a REDO/UNDO approach, in which it would've been important to tell the
> difference, but we never did that (and probably never will). I've
> preserved the distinction because it seemed worthwhile from the
> standpoint of documentation and logical clarity, but if you see a reason
> to get rid of it, I won't argue hard for it.
>

No strong reasons to remove them, though the comments are kind of
confusing.

Regards,
Qingqing