Re: Commit timestamp abbreviations

From: Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Commit timestamp abbreviations
Date: 2014-12-24 15:55:52
Message-ID: 549AE208.2000500@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 24/12/14 15:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 06:00:21PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> I noticed this when looking at the allocated shared memory structures in
>>> head:
>>>
>>> shared memory alignment 64-byte of CommitTs Ctl: 0
>>> shared memory alignment 64-byte of CommitTs shared: 0
>>>
>>> I thought we got rid of the idea that 'Ts' means timestamp. Was this
>>> part forgotten?
>>
>> Do you have a specific reference? That's not the concern I remember,
>> and I sure don't want to re-read that whole thread again.
>
> I remember the issue of using _ts and 'ts' inconsistently, and I thought
> we were going to spell out timestamp in more places, but maybe I am
> remembering incorrectly.
>

The change was from committs to commit_ts + CommitTs depending on place.

--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2014-12-24 16:20:15 Re: Misaligned BufferDescriptors causing major performance problems on AMD
Previous Message Tom Lane 2014-12-24 15:47:24 Re: replicating DROP commands across servers