| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Stas Kelvich <s(dot)kelvich(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> | 
| Subject: | Re: Global snapshots | 
| Date: | 2018-05-02 02:58:37 | 
| Message-ID: | 0cec343f-a50c-a40c-a299-a4043960e26c@2ndquadrant.com | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On 5/1/18 12:27, Stas Kelvich wrote:
> Clock-SI is described in [5] and here I provide a small overview, which
> supposedly should be enough to catch the idea. Assume that each node runs Commit
> Sequence Number (CSN) based visibility: database tracks one counter for each
> transaction start (xid) and another counter for each transaction commit (csn).
> In such setting, a snapshot is just a single number -- a copy of current CSN at
> the moment when the snapshot was taken. Visibility rules are boiled down to
> checking whether current tuple's CSN is less than our snapshot's csn. Also it
> worth of mentioning that for the last 5 years there is an active proposal to
> switch Postgres to CSN-based visibility [6].
But that proposal has so far not succeeded.  How are you overcoming the
reasons for that?
-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2018-05-02 03:05:50 | Re: A few warnings on Windows | 
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2018-05-02 02:55:58 | Re: pgsql: Clean up warnings from -Wimplicit-fallthrough. |