| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Snapshot warning |
| Date: | 2008-11-25 17:01:39 |
| Message-ID: | 20081125170139.GL4875@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera escribió:
> The only thing I'm now missing is SnapshotResetXmin(). It currently
> looks like this:
> After the patch we don't have any way to detect whether resowner.c has
> any snapshot still linked to. I assume there's no objection to adding a
> new entry point in resowner.c for this.
Hmm, that doesn't readily work because there's no way to track
transaction boundaries in resource owners. I think I'll have to add a
separate static counter in snapmgr.c that's maintained by the calls from
resowner.c.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2008-11-25 17:15:36 | Re: Snapshot warning |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-11-25 16:50:38 | Re: Snapshot warning |