Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCHES] 64-bit CommandIds] - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Gregory Stark
Subject Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCHES] 64-bit CommandIds]
Date
Msg-id 87bq5ma51p.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to [Fwd: Re: [PATCHES] 64-bit CommandIds]  (Zoltan Boszormenyi <zb@cybertec.at>)
Responses Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCHES] 64-bit CommandIds]
List pgsql-hackers
"Zoltan Boszormenyi" <zb@cybertec.at> writes:

> Hi,
>
> what's your opinion on this?
> I saw response only from Alvaro on the -patches list.

I don't understand. The patch only affects configuration and SQL data type
code. It doesn't actually store the 64-bit commandid anywhere which would be
the actual hard part.

Do "phantom" command ids mean this all just works magically? Ie, the limit of
2^32 <cmin,cmax> pairs is still there but as long as you don't have to store
more than that many you get to have 2^64 raw ephemeral commandids?

--  Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB          http://www.enterprisedb.com Ask me about EnterpriseDB's Slony Replication
support!


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Zoltan Boszormenyi
Date:
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [PATCHES] 64-bit CommandIds]
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Detecting large-file support in configure