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

Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance
Date: 2010-04-21 14:12:43
Message-ID: 1271859163.8305.28038.camel@ebony (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 09:51 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> >
> > Adding an assertion isn't going to do much because it's unlikely anybody
> > is going to be running for 2^31 transactions with asserts enabled.
> >

> I think the assert is a good idea.  If there's no real problem here,
> the assert won't trip.  It's just a safety precaution.

If you believe that, then I think you should add this to all the other
places in the current server where that assumption is made without
assertion being added. As a safety precaution.

-- 
 Simon Riggs           www.2ndQuadrant.com


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: marcin mankDate: 2010-04-21 14:22:50
Subject: Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance
Previous:From: Robert HaasDate: 2010-04-21 14:11:00
Subject: Re: testing HS/SR - 1 vs 2 performance

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