Re: Correcting freeze conflict horizon calculation

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>
Subject: Re: Correcting freeze conflict horizon calculation
Date: 2025-06-02 19:49:06
Message-ID: CAH2-WzmES1kQYCdBcMEjWgRoe-MHgR+STgCgPq08_eZNRtfgsQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 3:40 PM Melanie Plageman
<melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Oh, and, more specifically, in my previous email, I was wondering if,
> and why, in 16 this diff wouldn't be correct

I *think* that it would be correct.

Again, it is certainly possible to make the conflict horizon precisely
the oldest safe value in all cases. How much that actually buys you
seems much less clear.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Nathan Bossart 2025-06-02 19:55:40 Re: pg_upgrade: warn about roles with md5 passwords
Previous Message Sami Imseih 2025-06-02 19:44:36 Re: Improve explicit cursor handling in pg_stat_statements