On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 07:46:32AM +0000, Simon Riggs wrote:
> There is much wisdom there and much wisdom in leaving ancient warnings
> as we find them.
The comment is a wise and insightful statement -- about a totally
different system than we have today.
> Are these the words you object to?
>
> "we don't need to
> > * check commit time against the start time of this transaction
> > * because 2ph locking protects us from doing the wrong thing."
Yes, that clearly isn't true, and the subsequent bit about catalog
accesses isn't right either -- they may not be serializable, but that
isn't the reason why.
I don't particularly object to the warning that "the tests in this
routine are correct" (although indeed the fact that they've changed
over the years does seem to belie it).
So I'm also in favor of just removing the comment entirely.
Dan
--
Dan R. K. Ports MIT CSAIL http://drkp.net/
