Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review
Date
Msg-id 18187.1192033135@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
Responses Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review
Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review
List pgsql-hackers
Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> (Assuming it's technically sound - I still haven't checked the actual
> code, but I'm assuming it's Ok since Jan approved it)

I hadn't looked at it either, but here are a few things that need
review:

* Why no binary I/O support for the new datatype?  We tend to expect
that for all core types.

* Why is txid_current_snapshot() excluding subtransaction XIDs?  That
might be all right for the current uses in Slony/Skytools, but it seems
darn close to a bug for any other use.

* Why is txid_current_snapshot() reading SerializableSnapshot rather
than an actually current snap as its name suggests?  This isn't just
misleading, this will fail completely when SerializableSnapshot
goes away, as seems likely to happen in 8.4 (and no, we won't keep it
just because txid might want it).
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Marko Kreen"
Date:
Subject: Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review
Next
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: Skytools committed without hackers discussion/review