Re: PostgreSQL Anniversary Proposals -- Important Update

From: "Qingqing Zhou" <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Anniversary Proposals -- Important Update
Date: 2006-03-20 03:12:15
Message-ID: dvl6ol$2jlu$1@news.hub.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers


"Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote
>
> Hm, I already talked about that once:
> http://www.postgresql.org/files/developer/transactions.pdf
> but perhaps that's not the level of detail you are after?
>

Yeah, I've read the presentation -- and yes, that's not the level I am
after. Actually, I guess the completeness problem can be clarified with a
table:

a_complete_and_clear_division_of_transaction_time
SatisfySnapShot Y Y N N ...
SatisfyVacuum 1 2 2 3 ...

Not sure how to give the corrctness proof -- maybe if the
"a_complete_and_clear_division_of_transaction_time" is designed well enough,
we can find some consistency?

And as Alvaro suggested, maybe that's too narrow topic for a presentation --
so if the above idea is in the right track, I'd like to write an initial
document (so you guys can modify it) if nobody is interested in doing that.

Regards,
Qingqing

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Satoshi Nagayasu 2006-03-20 03:45:42 Re: PostgreSQL Anniversary Proposals -- Important
Previous Message Devrim GUNDUZ 2006-03-19 23:08:26 Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL Anniversary Proposals --

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Satoshi Nagayasu 2006-03-20 03:45:42 Re: PostgreSQL Anniversary Proposals -- Important
Previous Message Jan Cruz 2006-03-20 02:35:24 Re: suggestion