Re: Small Bug in GetConflictingVirtualXIDs

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Small Bug in GetConflictingVirtualXIDs
Date: 2009-12-21 15:38:07
Message-ID: 15331.1261409887@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> Andres Freund wrote:
>> The logic behind this seems fine except in the case of dropping a database.
>> There you very well might have a open connection without an open snapshot.

> Perhaps the simplest fix is to ensure that drop database gets a snapshot?

I confess to not having followed the thread closely, but why is DROP
DATABASE special in this regard? Wouldn't we soon find ourselves
needing every utility command to take a snapshot?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2009-12-21 15:48:52 Re: Small Bug in GetConflictingVirtualXIDs
Previous Message Rafael Martinez 2009-12-21 15:37:44 Re: Table size does not include toast size