Re: Multixid hindsight design

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Multixid hindsight design
Date: 2015-06-01 19:53:39
Message-ID: CAEepm=262u+wVKxmb3y+pUM5rDBrhmLYUZWKZntDQfwCqnVfiw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> The beauty of this would be that the TED entries can be zapped at restart,
> just like pg_subtrans, and pg_multixact before 9.3. It doesn't need to be
> WAL-logged, and we are free to change its on-disk layout even in a minor
> release.

What about prepared transactions? They can lock rows FOR SHARE that
survive server restarts.

--
Thomas Munro
http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-06-01 19:54:10 Re: Join Filter vs. Index Cond (performance regression 9.1->9.2+/HEAD)
Previous Message Tom Lane 2015-06-01 19:31:25 Re: Join Filter vs. Index Cond (performance regression 9.1->9.2+/HEAD)