Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev(at)SECTORBASE(dot)COM>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem
Date: 2001-05-19 03:15:13
Message-ID: 28236.990242113@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I am confused why we can't implement subtransactions as part of our
> command counter? The counter is already 4 bytes long. Couldn't we
> rollback to counter number X-10?

That'd work within your own transaction, but not from outside it.
After you commit, how will other backends know which command-counter
values of your transaction to believe, and which not?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2001-05-19 03:17:47 Fix for tablename in targetlist
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-05-19 03:12:41 Re: Plans for solving the VACUUM problem