Re: [PATCH] Transaction traceability - txid_status(bigint)

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Transaction traceability - txid_status(bigint)
Date: 2016-08-23 16:59:35
Message-ID: CAMsr+YHzb6DLZ05gqagM-BoOhAcO-U5152ijfELiw4c22-e3+Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 23 August 2016 at 22:18, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > Updated patch series attached. As before, 0-4 intended for commit, 5 just
> > because it'll be handy to have around for people doing wraparound related
> > testing.
> >
> > Again, thanks for taking a look.
>
> /me reviews a bit more deeply.
>
> In 0001, it seems to me that "in-progress" should be "in progress".
>

Fine by me. I was on the fence about it anyway.

+CREATE TYPE txid_status AS ENUM ('committed', 'in-progress', 'aborted');
>

> I'm not really that keen on this approach. I don't think we need to
> introduce a new data type for this, and I would rather not use SQL,
> either. It would be faster and simpler to just return the appropriate
> string from a C function defined directly.
>

Also fine by me. You're right, keep it simple. It means the potential set
of values isn't discoverable the same way, but ... meh. Using it usefully
means reading the docs anyway.

The remaining 2 patches of interest are attached - txid_status() and
txid_convert_if_recent(). Thanks for committing txid_current_if_assigned().

Now I'd best stop pretending I'm in a sensible timezone.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Attachment Content-Type Size
0001-txid_status-v3.patch text/x-patch 13.7 KB
0002-txid_convert_if_recent-v3.patch text/x-patch 11.9 KB

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Craig Ringer 2016-08-23 17:02:09 Re: Logical decoding of sequence advances, part II
Previous Message Robert Haas 2016-08-23 16:56:49 Re: Index Onlys Scan for expressions