Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-01-12 at 18:46 +0000, Gregory Stark wrote:
>> To do something like that the user would have to create a prepared transaction
>> to save the snapshot. I think that makes sense though since effectively it's
>> just requiring that the user explicitly do what would otherwise be a hidden
>> implicit requirement -- that the user do something to hold globalxmin back to
>> avoid having the snapshots expire.
> This is a good idea which I will want to develop in the future, not yet
I haven't been following this thread in detail, but I'd just like to
point out that there's a couple features in the XA spec that we don't
- ability to "stop" a transaction, and resume it later, executing other
transactions in between.
- ability to stop a transaction, and resume it later in another connection.
Neither of these are essential for two-phase commit, which is what the
spec is for, but if they happened to fall out of some other work, it
would be nice...
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2008-01-20 12:58:08|
|Subject: Re: Declarative partitioning grammar|
|Previous:||From: Simon Riggs||Date: 2008-01-20 12:16:02|
|Subject: Re: Transaction Snapshot Cloning|