On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 15:42 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 11:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> It would be far *more* useful if it didn't have to be superuser-only.
> >> And since the actual details of the snapshot content are really of
> >> zero interest to the user, I think making it pass through his hands
> >> is simply misdesign.
> > No, its deliberate, because I want this to work on prior releases. I
> > didn't clearly explain that, sorry.
> Why are you trying to get the community to do design for things that
> are certainly not going to appear in any community release?
Reasonable question, but its not really my way to do such things.
I started looking at this for an 8.4 only solution and will be
submitting a patch for the internal route, eventually.
After looking at this for a while, I realised the snapshots aren't
easily accessible, so would require a specific publishing function. My
main focus for this was Slony, so I realised that Slony already has this
facility. So if we did this via an installable module approach then we
would be able to use it much sooner for upgrading to 8.3, rather than
waiting for 8.4
It's too late to get anything into 8.3, but its not too late to get into
a Slony version that can help upgrade to 8.3.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2008-01-12 21:19:11|
|Subject: Re: Postgresql Materialized views|
|Previous:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2008-01-12 20:42:27|
|Subject: Re: Transaction Snapshot Cloning |