From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Snapshot synchronization, again... |
Date: | 2011-02-28 17:59:56 |
Message-ID: | 26171.1298915996@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de> wrote:
>> Remember that it's not only about saving shared memory, it's also
>> about making sure that the snapshot reflects a state of the database
>> that has actually existed at some point in the past.
> But you can do all of this with files too, can't you? Just remove or
> truncate the file when the snapshot is no longer valid.
Yeah. I think adopting a solution similar to 2PC state files is a very
reasonable way to go here. This isn't likely to be a high-usage or
performance-critical feature, so it's not essential to keep the
information in shared memory for performance reasons.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2011-02-28 18:04:54 | Re: Why our counters need to be time-based WAS: WIP: cross column correlation ... |
Previous Message | Andrew Hammond | 2011-02-28 17:50:34 | mysql2pgsql.perl update |