From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
---|---|
To: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: _RollbackFunc : dead code? |
Date: | 2005-03-31 16:24:33 |
Message-ID: | 20050331162433.GI31118@dcc.uchile.cl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Mar 31, 2005 at 05:07:39PM +0100, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-03-27 at 16:01 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> > > So I think this is dead code. The attached patch removes it.
> >
> > Yeah, it is dead code; it's a leftover from Vadim's old plan to implement
> > Oracle-style UNDO. AFAIK none of the current crop of hackers wants to
> > proceed in that direction, so we may as well remove the last traces.
>
> Agreed.
>
> We still need to explain *why* at some point, but thats still one of my
> WIPs.
Sorry, what's your WIP? Explain why nobody wants to implement UNDO? Or
implement UNDO? Or why at some point somebody wanted to implement UNDO?
Now I remember that in the WAL docs there is a paragraph or two
mentioning that in a future project we want to implement UNDO ... maybe
it's a good idea to rip that off.
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[(at)]dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>)
"Un poeta es un mundo encerrado en un hombre" (Victor Hugo)
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-03-31 16:32:27 | Re: _RollbackFunc : dead code? |
Previous Message | Simon Riggs | 2005-03-31 16:07:39 | Re: _RollbackFunc : dead code? |