Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [NOVICE] Last ID Problem

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>
Cc: John Hansen <john(at)geeknet(dot)com(dot)au>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>,Michael Fuhr <mike(at)fuhr(dot)org>, Mitch Pirtle <mitch(dot)pirtle(at)gmail(dot)com>,Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp>,pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>,operationsengineer1(at)yahoo(dot)com, pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [NOVICE] Last ID Problem
Date: 2005-02-01 22:44:47
Message-ID: 1107297887.12465.103.camel@localhost.localdomain (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-novice
On Tue, 2005-02-01 at 11:24 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> How about the TID?

That wouldn't be sufficiently stable for use by client applications, I
believe: a concurrent VACUUM FULL could mean your TID no longer points
at what you think it does.

-Neil



In response to

Responses

pgsql-novice by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-02-01 22:50:26
Subject: Re: [NOVICE] Last ID Problem
Previous:From: Joshua D. DrakeDate: 2005-02-01 16:56:52
Subject: Re: [NOVICE] Last ID Problem

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-02-01 22:50:26
Subject: Re: [NOVICE] Last ID Problem
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-02-01 22:25:50
Subject: Re: float4 regression test failed on linux parisc

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group