| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Latest version of Hot Standby patch |
| Date: | 2009-01-07 22:08:08 |
| Message-ID: | 1231366088.18005.90.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 23:56 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 15:43 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> When there's no xids in the procarray, couldn't we just use
> >> latestCompletedXid instead of calling ReadNewTransactionId()?
> >
> > latestCompletedXid is protected by ProcArrayLock so not much difference
> > between those two.
>
> The big difference is that we're already holding ProcArrayLock. You
> could read the value of latestCompletedXid before releasing
> ProcArrayLock, and wouldn't need the retry logic.
Sounds good to me then. Will rework.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2009-01-07 22:14:28 | Re: Do we still need constraint_exclusion? |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2009-01-07 22:07:12 | Re: Significant oversight in that #include-removal script |