Re: Low hanging fruit in lazy-XID-assignment patch?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Florian G(dot) Pflug" <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Low hanging fruit in lazy-XID-assignment patch?
Date: 2007-09-08 16:21:23
Message-ID: 20070908162123.GA5290@alvh.no-ip.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


As a fallout of this work that I haven't seen made explicit, a session
opening a transaction and then sitting around doing nothing will not
cause as many problems as it used to -- for example it won't cause
VACUUM to be unable to clean up dead rows. Is this correct?

Nowadays this is no longer much of a problem, but it used to be, back
when drivers were more broken than they are now (when they had the
commit method send "COMMIT; BEGIN"); however, it still seems to me like
a big step forwards.

--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.amazon.com/gp/registry/5ZYLFMCVHXC
"Siempre hay que alimentar a los dioses, aunque la tierra esté seca" (Orual)

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2007-09-08 16:31:30 Re: Low hanging fruit in lazy-XID-assignment patch?
Previous Message apoc9009 2007-09-08 08:39:19 Re: [FEATURE REQUEST] Streaming Onlinebackup (Maybe OFFTOPIC)