From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: WAL logging of heap_mark4update |
Date: | 2005-01-15 21:48:56 |
Message-ID: | 12138.1105825736@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> writes:
> Hackers,
> In access/heap/heapam.c, in heap_mark4update(), there's a comment that
> states
> /*
> * XLOG stuff: no logging is required as long as we have no
> * savepoints. For savepoints private log could be used...
> */
> Is this still true in light of 8.0's savepoints?
It isn't. Since mark4update is simply establishing a lock, which isn't
going to be held across a system crash anyway, I see no need to WAL-log
it. (But hmmm ... to support 2PC we'd probably need to do so ...)
> I think the comment was made assuming that savepoints would be
> implemented using REDO,
I think the same.
> In any case I'm contemplating changing exclusive row locks to use
> LockAcquire, and supporting shared row locks using the same mechanism.
> All this per previous discussion on -hackers. We could get rid of
> heap_mark4update if that's done, right?
Right. The 2PC connection is another reason to do it that way --- 2PC
would require some way to save locks anyhow, and it'd be nice if there
were only one mechanism to deal with not two.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-01-15 22:47:27 | Encodings and docs |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2005-01-15 21:34:18 | Re: FATAL: catalog is missing 1 attribute(s) for relid |