| From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Inoue, Hiroshi" <h-inoue(at)dream(dot)email(dot)ne(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Hiroshi Saito <hiroshi(at)winpg(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: Removal of currtid()/currtid2() and some table AM cleanup |
| Date: | 2020-06-05 06:22:28 |
| Message-ID: | 20200605062228.GW89559@paquier.xyz |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 10:10:21PM +0900, Inoue, Hiroshi wrote:
> On 2020/06/03 11:14, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I have been looking at the ODBC driver and the need for currtid() as
>> well as currtid2(), and as mentioned already in [1], matching with my
>> lookup of things, these are actually not needed by the driver as long
>> as we connect to a server newer than 8.2 able to support RETURNING.
>
> Though currtid2() is necessary even for servers which support RETURNING,
> I don't object to remove it.
In which cases is it getting used then? From what I can see there is
zero coverage for that part in the tests. And based on a rough read
of the code, this would get called with LATEST_TUPLE_LOAD being set,
where there is some kind of bulk deletion involved. Couldn't that be
a problem?
--
Michael
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2020-06-05 06:30:05 | Re: A wrong index choose issue because of inaccurate statistics |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2020-06-05 06:18:53 | Re: A wrong index choose issue because of inaccurate statistics |