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
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? |