Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)
Date
Msg-id 1146.1006446347@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)  (Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> writes:
> But
> http://www.postgresql.org/idocs/index.php?sql-syntax-columns.html

That documentation is in error (my fault).  Current docs say

xmax
    The identity (transaction ID) of the deleting transaction, or zero    for an undeleted tuple. It is possible for
thisfield to     be nonzero in a visible tuple: that usually indicates that the    deleting transaction hasn't
committedyet, or that an     attempted deletion was rolled back. 
 

> I also think that this kas historically been the behaviour 

No, it wasn't.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: postgresql.conf (Proposed settings)
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: OCTET_LENGTH is wrong