Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Mark Dilger
Subject Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?
Date
Msg-id ACCF36E5-5342-4AE5-B5A4-E0EC67E4F248@enterprisedb.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?  (Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?
List pgsql-hackers

> On Apr 2, 2020, at 7:39 PM, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
<v9-0001-Add-SQL-type-xid8-to-expose-FullTransactionId-to-.patch><v9-0002-Introduce-xid8_XXX-functions-to-replace-txid_XXX.patch><v9-0003-Replace-all-txid_XXX-usage-in-tests-with-xid8_XXX.patch>

These apply cleanly, build and pass check-world on mac, and the documentation and regression test changes surrounding
txidlook good to me. 

FYI, (not the responsibility of this patch), we never quite define what the abbreviation "xip" stands for.  If "Active
xid8sat the time of the snapshot." were rewritten as "In progress xid8s at the time of the snapshot", it might be
slightlyeasier for the reader to figure out that "xip" = "Xid8s In Progress".  As it stands, nothing in the docs seems
toexplain the abbrevation.  See doc/src/sgml/func.sgml 

—
Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company






pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Etsuro Fujita
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] advanced partition matching algorithm forpartition-wise join
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: zombie connections