From: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pg_get_multixact_members not documented |
Date: | 2025-06-02 17:46:51 |
Message-ID: | CAA5RZ0tc_Lz5NipLkzceSbuYLYsXpx03426AUwkJu68P4SQ16Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> > Want to put together a patch?
>
> Yes, will do
v1-0001 is the documentation only patch. I improved upon the description
suggested in [0]
> > For extra credit, maybe we could add a test or two, too...
I can add tests, even though we don't really have system function specific
testing.
A simple test will be a regress/sql which ensure the XID and lock mode
of a transaction using a savepoint, something like the below. To do anything
fancier with concurrency, we will need an isolation test.
```
drop table if exists t;
create table t (v int); insert into t values (1);
begin;
select from t for update ;
savepoint s1;
update t set v = v;
select pg_get_multixact_members(a.relminmxid), a.relminmxid from
(select relminmxid from pg_class where relname = 't') a;
commit;
```
Thoughts?
--
Sami Imseih
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
[0] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20150619215231.GT133018@postgresql.org
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
v1-0001-Document-pg_get_multixact_members.patch | application/octet-stream | 1.6 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-06-02 18:13:43 | Re: tighten generic_option_name, or store more carefully in catalog? |
Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-06-02 17:04:00 | Re: pg_upgrade: warn about roles with md5 passwords |