Dimitri Fontaine <dfontaine@hi-media.com> writes:
> Le mercredi 26 mars 2008, Tom Lane a écrit :
>> whenever the number of active snapshots goes to zero
> Does this ever happen?
Certainly: between any two commands of a non-serializable transaction.
In a serializable transaction the whole thing is a dead issue
anyway, since the original snapshot has to be kept.
There are corner cases involving open cursors where a snapshot
might persist longer, and then the optimization wouldn't apply.
The formulation that Alvaro gave would sometimes be able to
move xmin forward when the simple no-snaps-left rule wouldn't,
such as create cursor A, create cursor B (with a newer snap),
close cursor A. However I really doubt that scenarios like
this occur often enough to be worth having a much more expensive
snapshot-management mechanism.
regards, tom lane
