Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Marko Tiikkaja
Subject Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies
Date
Msg-id 4D6BF9E5.6020008@cs.helsinki.fi
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Review: Fix snapshot taking inconsistencies  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2011-02-28 9:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Marko Tiikkaja<marko.tiikkaja@cs.helsinki.fi>  writes:
>> On 2011-02-28 9:03 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> OK, and which behavior is getting changed, to what?  I am not interested
>>> in trying to reverse-engineer a specification from the patch.
>
>> My recollection is (and the archives seem to agree) that normal
>> execution and SQL functions were changed to only advance the CID instead
>> of taking a new snapshot.  EXPLAIN ANALYZE and SPI (not exactly sure
>> about this one) did that already so they were just changed to use the
>> new API.
>
> OK, so the intent is that in all cases, we just advance CID and don't
> take a new snapshot between queries that were generated (by rule
> expansion) from a single original parsetree?  But we still take a new
> snap between original parsetrees?  Works for me.

Exactly.


Regards,
Marko Tiikkaja


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Glaesemann
Date:
Subject: Re: Why our counters need to be time-based WAS: WIP: cross column correlation ...
Next
From: Josh Berkus
Date:
Subject: Re: Why our counters need to be time-based WAS: WIP: cross column correlation ...