Re: advancing snapshot's xmin - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Dimitri Fontaine
Subject Re: advancing snapshot's xmin
Date
Msg-id 200803260933.27571.dfontaine@hi-media.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: advancing snapshot's xmin  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: advancing snapshot's xmin  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Le mercredi 26 mars 2008, Tom Lane a écrit :
> whenever the number of active snapshots goes to zero

Does this ever happen?
I mean, if the way to avoid locking contention is to rely on a production
system which let the service "breathe" from time to time, maybe there's
something wrong in the reasoning.

Of course I'm much more ready to accept I don't understand the first bit of it
all than to consider you're off-tracks here, but...
--
dim

If you ask a stupid question, you may feel stupid. If you don’t ask a stupid
question, you remain stupid.   -- Tony Rothman, Ph.D.U. Chicago, Physics

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Surfacing qualifiers
Next
From: Gregory Stark
Date:
Subject: Re: advancing snapshot's xmin