On mån, 2012-01-16 at 22:59 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun ene 16 12:27:03 -0300 2012:
> >
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
> > > Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of dom ene 15 10:00:03 -0300 2012:
> > >> On ons, 2011-12-28 at 14:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >>> The trouble with using ReadNewTransactionId is that it makes the results
> > >>> volatile, not stable as the function is declared to be.
> >
> > >> Could we alleviate that problem with some caching within the function?
> >
> > > Maybe if we have it be invalidated at transaction end, that could work.
> > > So each new transaction would get a fresh value.
> >
> > Yeah, I think that would work.
>
> So who's going to work on a patch? Peter, are you? If not, we should
> add it to the TODO list.
Not at this very moment, but maybe in a few weeks.
