| From: | Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Sami Imseih <samimseih(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Xuneng Zhou <xunengzhou(at)gmail(dot)com>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Reject WAIT FOR earlier in transaction-snapshot mode |
| Date: | 2026-09-17 23:13:00 |
| Message-ID: | CAPpHfdtsGcNmVKFRvi-AGA+C+2Cauu_OHdTsAfLoRp1WW73P5A@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 12:28 AM Sami Imseih <samimseih(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > Agreed. v7 attached: three paragraphs collapsed into one, close to your
> > wording. I kept three bits from v6:
>
> Only nit I have is:
>
> which <literal>standby_replay</literal> waits for and the
> + other standby modes ultimately depend on.
>
> The "ultimately depends on" is not very clear. I would change it to:
>
> "which <literal>standby_replay</literal> waits for, and could also
> delay waits in
> the other standby modes."
That still doesn't sound clear for me. Could you, please, check v8?
------
Regards,
Alexander Korotkov
Supabase
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| v8-0001-Say-what-WAIT-s-snapshot-restriction-actually-is.patch | application/octet-stream | 6.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Sami Imseih | 2026-09-17 23:24:51 | Re: Reject WAIT FOR earlier in transaction-snapshot mode |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2026-09-17 23:00:43 | Re: Report index currently being vacuumed in pg_stat_progress_vacuum |