Re: nested xacts and phantom Xids - Mailing list pgsql-patches

From Bruce Momjian
Subject Re: nested xacts and phantom Xids
Date
Msg-id 200406202130.i5KLUb305895@candle.pha.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: nested xacts and phantom Xids  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: nested xacts and phantom Xids  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@dcc.uchile.cl> writes:
> > > Here I present the nested transactions patch and the phantom Xids patch
> > > that goes with it.
> >
> > I looked at the phantom XIDs stuff a bit.  I still have little confidence
> > that the concept is correct :-( but here are some comments on the code
> > level.
> >
> > > +  * They are marked immediately in pg_subtrans as direct childs of the topmost
> > > +  * Xid (no matter how deep we are in the transaction tree),
> >
> > Why is that a good idea --- won't it cause problems when you
> > commit/abort an intermediate level of subtransaction?
>
> I don't think so.  The phantom xid is used only by the outside
> transaction waiting for that tuple to be committe or aborted.  The
> outside tranaction will sleep on the topmost xid completing, then check
> the phantom xid status for commit/abort. Within the transaction, I think
> he uses command counter to know the creation and destruction sub-xid.
>
> I think right now phantom xids are used only for making parts of a
> subtransaction committed or aborted and only in cases where the tuple is
> created and destroyed by parts of the same transaction tree.
>
> I don't feel too bad about the runtime cost if only subtransactions are
> paying that cost.  I know we are really stretching the system here but I
> would like to try a little more rather than give up and taking a space
> hit for all tuples.

Let me add that outside transactions read those phantom xid only when
they are doing dirty reads.  What I don't understand is when do outside
transactions see tuples created inside a transaction?  INSERT into a
table with a unique key?

Once the main transaction commits, these phantom tuples should work just
like ordinary tuples except they get their cmin overwritten when they
are expired, I think.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

pgsql-patches by date:

Previous
From: Gavin Sherry
Date:
Subject: Re: Tablespaces
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: nested xacts and phantom Xids