| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Hans-Juergen Schoenig <hs(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Decibel!" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Zoltan Boszormenyi" <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at>, "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "PG Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [Fwd: Re: [PATCHES] 64-bit CommandIds] |
| Date: | 2008-03-21 14:41:11 |
| Message-ID: | 20626.1206110471@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hans-Juergen Schoenig <hs(at)cybertec(dot)at> writes:
> Doing this for XIDs is pretty useless this days.
> It is only targeted for command ids which are consumed heavily by
> stored procedure languages.
> It happens once on a while that a complex business logic procedure
> runs out of command ids inside a transaction.
> the idea is to give users a chance to avoid that.
> touching XIDs does not make sense to me at all.
In view of the fact that 8.3 greatly reduced the CommandID consumption
of typical plpgsql code
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-committers/2007-11/msg00585.php
I wonder whether the case for wider CIDs hasn't likewise taken a
major hit.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | NikhilS | 2008-03-21 14:45:43 | Re: Auto Partitioning Patch - WIP version 1 |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2008-03-21 14:38:29 | Re: Proposal: new large object API |