Re: Exposing the Xact commit order to the user

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Exposing the Xact commit order to the user
Date: 2010-06-03 21:58:19
Message-ID: AANLkTilUsoN34UmSrYhYRiMHyOyu1lmVvNjQhX3uTjcZ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com> wrote:
>> I'm puzzled how you would define this value. How do you add 7 inserts,
>> 7 deletes, and 7 updates? Is that 21 rows modified?
>
> I actually have a hard time understanding why people are so opposed to a
> feature that has zero impact at all unless a DBA actually turns in ON. What
> is the problem with exposing the commit order of transactions?

The post you were responding to was regarding the meaninglessness of
the "number of records" attribute you wanted. Your response is a non
sequitor.

I think the commit order of transactions would be a good thing to
expose though I've asked repeatedly what kind of interface you need
and never gotten answers to all the questions.

--
greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dan Colish 2010-06-03 22:02:46 Re: SET CONSTRAINTS todo
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2010-06-03 21:31:54 Re: Allow wal_keep_segments to keep all segments