Re: [HACKERS] Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transactionid (XID)? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transactionid (XID)?
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmob65jf2Mtg9+Z8ddDNR7CjBYK7a-nqUqhZZr5W3xvdKZg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transactionid (XID)?  (Alexander Korotkov <a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transactionid (XID)?
Re: [HACKERS] Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transactionid (XID)?
Re: [HACKERS] Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transactionid (XID)?
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 5:33 AM, Alexander Korotkov
<a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru> wrote:
> pg_prune_xid makes sense only for heap pages.  Once we introduce special
> area for heap pages, we can move pg_prune_xid there and save some bytes in
> index pages.  However, this is an optimization not directly related to
> 64-bit xids.  Idea is that if we anyway change page format, why don't apply
> this optimization as well?  But if we have any doubts in this, it can be
> removed with no problem.

My first reaction is that changing the page format seems like a
non-starter, because it would break pg_upgrade.  If we get the heap
storage API working, then we could have a heap AM that works as it
does today and a newheap AM with such changes, but I have a bit of a
hard time imagining a patch that causes a hard compatibility break
ever being accepted.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Re: proposal - psql: possibility to specify sort fordescribe commands, when size is printed
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Challenges preventing us moving to 64 bit transactionid (XID)?