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

Re: Snapshot management, final

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Pg Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Snapshot management, final
Date: 2008-04-23 13:25:15
Message-ID: 1208957115.4259.1312.camel@ebony.site (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 08:21 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 18:13 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > Simon Riggs wrote:
> > > 
> > > > OK, so it can;t be copied to a longer lived memory context?
> > > 
> > > If you need that ability, please explain.
> > 
> > No, I wish to prevent that, not enable it.
> 
> I see.  Sure, we don't have that problem.  In fact, we didn't have it
> before either, so I'm not sure I see your point :-)

You originally said "because its not needed" but didn't explain why. I
wanted to make sure there was no loophole. I'm not trying to make any
other point, just checking.

Forgive me for being dense, but what is there to stop you using a
CopySnapshot in TopMemoryContext? If you did, there would be no way to
free it, nor would we notice it had been done, AFAICS. Not anything I'm
thinking about doing, though.

-- 
  Simon Riggs
  2ndQuadrant  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com


In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-04-23 13:43:44
Subject: Re: Snapshot management, final
Previous:From: Alvaro HerreraDate: 2008-04-23 12:24:36
Subject: Re: Snapshot management, final

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