| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "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>, "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Removal of currtid()/currtid2() and some table AM cleanup |
| Date: | 2020-11-20 15:14:49 |
| Message-ID: | 9c80b43e-3090-a343-32d1-ff774de74402@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2020-09-03 12:14, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 01:11:55PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> From what I can see on this thread, we could just remove currtid() per
>> the arguments of the RETURNING ctid clause supported since PG 8.2, but
>> it would make more sense to me to just remove both currtid/currtid2()
>> at once.
>
> The CF bot is complaining, so here is a rebase for the main patch.
> Opinions are welcome about the arguments of upthread.
It appears that currtid2() is still used, so we ought to keep it.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gilles Darold | 2020-11-20 15:18:38 | Re: Issue with server side statement-level rollback |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2020-11-20 15:06:43 | Re: abstract Unix-domain sockets |