Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Hannu Krosing
Subject Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)
Date
Msg-id 3BFE1DBB.9090105@tm.ee
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Further open item (Was: Status of 7.2)  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:

>Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> writes:
>
>>But could we not make it so that rollback will also reset xmax and cmax 
>>to 0.
>>
>
>We never have done that and I don't see why we should start.
>(And no, I'm not sure that it'd be entirely safe; there are
>concurrency/atomicity issues involved, because we do not
>insist on getting exclusive lock to set the it's-dead-Jim
>flag bit.)
>
>We could make the user readout of xmax/cmax be zeroes if the flag
>bits show they are invalid.
>
If there is a cheap way to get a list of pending transactions, then we 
could make them
read out as 0 if they are about to be deleted (ie xmax in 
pending_transactions()) and
else show the value of the transaction that is about to delete them.

>But this really just begs the question
>of what use they are to users in the first place.  I can't see any;
>and if we make them read as zeroes then they for sure won't have any.
>
I can see some use for xmax user-visible only while being deleted.

At least this would be more useful than themeaning
last-trx-that-was-about-to-delete.

Another way for getting equivalent functionality would be to make the
pending_transactions() function available to users.

---------------
Hannu




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Mathijs Brands
Date:
Subject: Re: Storage Location Patch Proposal for V7.3
Next
From: Levi Senft
Date:
Subject: PostGreSQL 7.1.3 & SCO OpenServer 5.0.6 problems