| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server: Rearrange pg_subtrans |
| Date: | 2004-08-25 22:43:49 |
| Message-ID: | 9585.1093473829@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> I don't know the details, but with postgres's model wouldn't it be a simply
> matter of treating every tuple found as having been inserting or deleted
> without checking to see if the transaction id in the tuple is committed?
No. At least not if you want a view of the data that's even marginally
sane (not multiple versions of the same row, for instance, or versions
that are definitely dead by anyone's viewpoint).
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-08-26 02:47:28 | Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2004-08-25 22:34:13 | Re: pgsql-server: Update that 8.0 will support MS Win |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | pgsql | 2004-08-26 01:33:50 | Re: Contrib -- PostgreSQL shared variables -with swap |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2004-08-25 22:34:36 | Re: futex |