| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Prepared transactions vs novice DBAs, again |
| Date: | 2009-04-23 02:14:07 |
| Message-ID: | 603c8f070904221914n2e1294f5ib706b43985fe86af@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 9:21 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Maybe I'm just dumb, but I don't get it. If I start a transaction and
> do "SELECT * FROM foo" and then wait around for an hour or two while
> someone else makes changes to foo and then do "SELECT * FROM foo"
> again, I expect to see the same rows I saw the first time, which means
> they still need to be around.
Yeah, I'm dumb. It doesn't work this way. I guess I always assumed
that this was the reason why <idle in transaction> caused database
bloat, but apparently not!
...Robert
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-04-23 02:47:54 | Re: 8.4b1 regression? |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2009-04-23 01:27:38 | Re: pg_restore -j <nothing> |