Re: [HACKERS] Transaction system (proposal for 6.5)

From: Vadim Mikheev <vadim(at)krs(dot)ru>
To: Robson Miranda <rmiranda(at)rudah(dot)com(dot)br>
Cc: PostgreSQL hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Transaction system (proposal for 6.5)
Date: 1998-09-25 02:43:28
Message-ID: 360B0350.E60F37D7@krs.ru
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robson Miranda wrote:
>
> I was thinking in a major rewrite of the PostrgreSQL transaction
> system, in order to provide less tuple overhead and recoverabilty.
>
> My first goal is to reduce tuple overhead, getting rid of xmin/xman and
> cmin/cmax. To provide this functionality, I'm planning to keep only a

I need in xmin & xmax for multi-version concurrency control...
Let's decide what should be implemented in 6.5...

> To address the problem of non-functional update, I pretend to store a
> command identifier with the tuple, and, during update, see if the cid of
> a tuple is equal of the current cid of this transaction (like we do
> today).

cmin & cmax very simplifies implementation of data changes
visibility rules - I'm not sure is it ever possible to
do this having only one attribute for command id,
keeping in mind triggers, (PL/)SQL-funcs...

Vadim

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1998-09-25 03:38:40 Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump, problem with user defined types?
Previous Message Thomas G. Lockhart 1998-09-25 02:30:51 Re: [HACKERS] pg_dump, problem with user defined types?