Re: Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transaction id (XID)? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andres Freund
Subject Re: Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transaction id (XID)?
Date
Msg-id 20190213134209.eojban3wmb6ridfd@alap3.anarazel.de
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transaction id (XID)?  (Chris Travers <chris.travers@adjust.com>)
Responses Re: Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transaction id (XID)?  (Jim Finnerty <jfinnert@amazon.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 2019-02-13 12:16:33 +0100, Chris Travers wrote:
> As a note here, I have worked on projects where there could be 2-week-long
> idle-in-transaction states (no joke, we tuned things to only use virtual
> xids for most of that time), and having an ability to set
> idle-in-transaction timeouts to figures of greater than a month are things
> I could imagine doing.  I would certainly favor the idea of 64-big GUC
> variables as a general rule.

How about proposing a patch for it in a new thread?

Greetings,

Andres Freund


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: dataegret
Date:
Subject: Re: WAL insert delay settings
Next
From: Dmitry Dolgov
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq compression