Using MyDatabaseId in SET_LOCKTAG_APPLY_TRANSACTION

From: Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Using MyDatabaseId in SET_LOCKTAG_APPLY_TRANSACTION
Date: 2025-11-27 16:00:30
Message-ID: CACG=ezYRM-qKnQdYvt+M-AiW7ziwBF54r4MKmFQj5o0TnRtniA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi!

While working on a patch to implement 64-bit transaction IDs in
PostgreSQL, I ran into a small problem. The
LockApplyTransactionForSession/UnlockApplyTransactionForSession
functions utilize the SET_LOCKTAG_APPLY_TRANSACTION macro, which
assumes XIDs are 32-bits.

In my case, the transaction IDs are growing twice as large, and we don't
have enough space to store them. I could simply resize the LOCKTAG
structure, extending it by 32 bits, but this is not the best solution.

However, I noticed that the MyDatabaseId field in
SET_LOCKTAG_APPLY_TRANSACTION appears unnecessary. As far as I
understand, the suboid should already uniquely identify the
subscription. Is the MyDatabaseId field truly necessary? Will only the
suboid suffice? I would be pleased to hear your thoughts on this.

--
Best regards,
Maxim Orlov.

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Geoghegan 2025-11-27 16:40:18 Re: weird ON CONFLICT clauses
Previous Message Álvaro Herrera 2025-11-27 16:00:24 weird ON CONFLICT clauses