Re: [HACKERS] next XID is in shmem now... - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Vadim Mikheev
Subject Re: [HACKERS] next XID is in shmem now...
Date
Msg-id 35B4C3D6.F15F4C3B@krs.ru
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] next XID is in shmem now...  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] next XID is in shmem now...  (Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Backends fetch 1024 XIDs now and place them in shmem.
> > There is space in VariableCache struct for OIDs as well
> > but I didn't change GetNewObjectId() due to the
> > CheckMaxObjectId() stuff... Bruce ?
>
> What can I do to help?  Is the problem that a backend can set the next
> oid by specifiying an oid greater than the current one?

No problem - I just havn't time to think about this, sorry.

>
> >
> > All other LLL stuff will be #ifdef-ed...
>
> As far as I am concerned, you don't need use #ifdef.

I'm not sure how much ready/robust this will be in 6.4.
This is long-term project...

Vadim

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Complexity of contrib types
Next
From: Vince Vielhaber
Date:
Subject: Hey Linux People (OT)