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

Re: nested transactions

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Ken Hirsch <kahirsch(at)bellsouth(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: nested transactions
Date: 2002-11-28 03:48:28
Message-ID: 200211280348.gAS3mSD08150@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Ken Hirsch wrote:
> From: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
> > And finally, I must abort tuple changes made by the aborted
> > subtransaction.  One way of doing that is to keep all relation id's
> > modified by the transaction, and do a sequential scan of the tables on
> > abort, changing the transaction id's to a fixed aborted transaction id.
> > However, this could be slow.  (We could store tids if only a few rows
> > are updated by a subtransaction.  That would speed it up considerably.)
> 
> Are you sure you don't want to use the log for this?  It does mean that the
> log can grow without bound for long-lived transactions, but it's very
> straightforward and fast.

I don't think we want to have unlimited log file growth for long running
transactions/subtransactions.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-11-28 03:59:46
Subject: Re: Planning for improved versions of IN/NOT IN
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-11-28 03:47:33
Subject: Re: nested transactions

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