The corresponding relminxid patch; try 1

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: The corresponding relminxid patch; try 1
Date: 2006-06-11 22:20:22
Message-ID: 20060611222022.GB15211@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Hi,

This is the relminxid patch corresponding to the pg_ntclass patch I just
posted. Obviously, the relminxid and relvacuumxid fields are in
pg_ntclass (not pg_class like in the previous incarnations of this
patch). This makes the whole business much saner and now I don't need
to insert bogus CommandCounterIncrement calls. Regression tests pass.

The thing that bothers me most about this is that it turns LockRelation
into an operation that needs to heap_fetch() from pg_ntclass in some
cases, and possibly update it. I think we should consider some sort of
"non-transactional shared cache" for storing RELKIND_NON_TRANSACTIONAL
catalog entries. Eventually it may help the sequences stuff as well, if
we implement sequences using that kind of catalog.

The documentation changes may be a bit off in this patch, since I didn't
worry about merging it with the pg_ntclass patch. But it's easy to
correct and I'll do it before committing it.

My intention is to wait two or three days after committing the
pg_ntclass patch, and then commit this one, unless I hear objections
before that.

Attachment Content-Type Size
relminxid-ntclass-1.patch text/plain 93.8 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zoltan Boszormenyi 2006-06-11 22:38:50 Extended SERIAL parsing
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2006-06-11 21:58:03 Re: Non-transactional pg_class, try 2

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-06-12 00:03:22 Re: Non-transactional pg_class, try 2
Previous Message Alvaro Herrera 2006-06-11 21:58:03 Re: Non-transactional pg_class, try 2