On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 12:37 +0000, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 18:46 +0000, Gregory Stark wrote:
> >> To do something like that the user would have to create a prepared transaction
> >> to save the snapshot. I think that makes sense though since effectively it's
> >> just requiring that the user explicitly do what would otherwise be a hidden
> >> implicit requirement -- that the user do something to hold globalxmin back to
> >> avoid having the snapshots expire.
> > This is a good idea which I will want to develop in the future, not yet
> > though.
> I haven't been following this thread in detail, but I'd just like to
> point out that there's a couple features in the XA spec that we don't
> currently support:
> - ability to "stop" a transaction, and resume it later, executing other
> transactions in between.
> - ability to stop a transaction, and resume it later in another connection.
> Neither of these are essential for two-phase commit, which is what the
> spec is for, but if they happened to fall out of some other work, it
> would be nice...
Thanks for the info.
Sounds like this idea would provide some of the groundwork for the
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Gregory Stark||Date: 2008-01-20 15:11:28|
|Subject: Re: Transaction Snapshot Cloning|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2008-01-20 12:58:08|
|Subject: Re: Declarative partitioning grammar|