Re: Improve description of XLOG_RUNNING_XACTS

From: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
To: Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, bharath(dot)rupireddyforpostgres(at)gmail(dot)com, sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com, ashutosh(dot)bapat(at)enterprisedb(dot)com, ashutosh(dot)bapat(dot)oss(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Improve description of XLOG_RUNNING_XACTS
Date: 2022-11-01 07:22:59
Message-ID: Y2DHdaOGBMnQ88Gg@paquier.xyz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 02:53:57PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> No objections from here if you want to go ahead with v3 and print the
> full set of subxids on top of the information about these
> overflowing.

While browsing the CF entries, this was still listed. Amit, any
updates?
--
Michael

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Munro 2022-11-01 07:36:18 Direct I/O
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2022-11-01 07:16:51 Re: heavily contended lwlocks with long wait queues scale badly