Re: Nested transactions: low level stuff - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Nested transactions: low level stuff
Date
Msg-id 20452.1048136033@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Nested transactions: low level stuff  ("Vadim Mikheev" <vmikheev@reveredata.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"Vadim Mikheev" <vmikheev@reveredata.com> writes:
>> Given all the flak we got about WAL growth during the time we had that
>> code enabled, I think there's no chance that UNDO will be the preferred
>> path.  It's not workable with big transactions.

> Somehow it's working in other DB systems.

Isn't limited UNDO segment size one of the most-hated management
problems for Oracle databases?  I don't see why we should want to
duplicate one of their worst problems.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Neil Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: A bad behavior under autocommit off mode
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: A bad behavior under autocommit off mode