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 truncate the file when the snapshot is no longer valid.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
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2011-02-28 18:04:54|
|Subject: Re: Why our counters need to be time-based WAS: WIP: cross
column correlation ...|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Hammond||Date: 2011-02-28 17:50:34|
|Subject: mysql2pgsql.perl update|