Re: Article in German iX magazine

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Holger Marzen <holger(at)marzen(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Article in German iX magazine
Date: 2004-01-23 20:59:33
Message-ID: 4002.1074891573@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-announce pgsql-general

Holger Marzen <holger(at)marzen(dot)de> writes:
> in the German magazine "iX" from Feb 2004 I read an article about Open
> Source databases. The part about PostgreSQL wasn't bad but I am not sure
> if the author is right when he writes about crash revcovery. He writes
> that PostgreSQL has no UNDO function that resets unfinished transactions
> after a crash but only a REDO function that finishes completed
> transactions.

> I thought that PostgreSQL's crash recovery automatically rolls back
> everything that's not committed.

That is correct. It is also correct that we don't need an explicit UNDO
operation to make it happen --- the correct behavior falls out of MVCC
support automatically, and we leave it to a subsequent VACUUM to reclaim
any space that can be reclaimed.

If the author stated that the lack of UNDO caused us not to be
crash-correct, he's wrong, but he is correct that there's no UNDO code.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-announce by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ezra Epstein 2004-01-23 21:50:03 feature request? expanded SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION
Previous Message Holger Marzen 2004-01-23 19:44:57 Article in German iX magazine

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ezra Epstein 2004-01-23 21:50:03 feature request? expanded SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2004-01-23 20:51:29 Re: sequence in schema -- broken default