Re: Static snapshot data

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Manfred Koizar <mkoi-pg(at)aon(dot)at>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Static snapshot data
Date: 2003-06-02 16:09:44
Message-ID: 200306021609.h52G9i307773@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > After lots of discussion, it seems this is to be applied.
>
> I'm still concerned that this will create problems for nested
> transactions, while saving only an insignificant number of cycles per
> transaction. I would suggest putting the idea on hold until the
> dust has settled from nested transactions. If it's still workable
> after that feature is complete, we can shave cycles then.

My feeling was that Manfred/Alvero are dealing with nested transactions,
so if they both want the patch applied, we apply it. If they want it
back, they can grab it from CVS.

--
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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-06-02 16:18:05 Re: Linux startup script
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-06-02 16:07:28 Re: [HACKERS] GUC and postgresql.conf docs

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2003-06-02 16:18:32 Re: Start-scripts linux
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-06-02 16:07:28 Re: [HACKERS] GUC and postgresql.conf docs