Dan Ports <drkp(at)csail(dot)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> While looking into a SSI bug, I noticed that we don't actually
> display the pid of the holding transaction, even though we have
> that information available.
I thought we already had that, but clearly I was mistaken.
> The attached patch fixes that.
> One note is that it will show the pid of the backend that executed
> the transaction, even if that transaction has already committed. I
> have no particular opinion about whether it's more useful to do
> that or return null, so went with the smallest change. (The pid is
> null for PREPARED or summarized transactions).
The patch looks good to me and a quick test shows the expected
behavior. No warnings. Regression tests pass.
I guess the question is whether it's OK to include this during the
alpha testing phase. Even though it's a little bit of a stretch to
call it a bug, the argument could be made that omitting information
which all the other rows in the view have is an inconsistency which
borders on being a bug. The small size and verifiable safety of the
patch work in its favor.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-04-01 17:37:58|
|Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Support comments on FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER and
|Previous:||From: Christopher Browne||Date: 2011-04-01 17:17:34|
|Subject: Re: Should psql support URI syntax?|