Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com>, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Yura Sokolov <y(dot)sokolov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Evgeny Voropaev <evgeny(dot)voropaev(at)tantorlabs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: Add 64-bit XIDs into PostgreSQL 15
Date: 2026-02-13 02:35:56
Message-ID: aY6ODCBi_PMG-3Tn@momjian.us
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 09:54:30AM -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 1:19 AM Maxim Orlov <orlovmg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > The aim of this patch is to make Postgres support 64-bit XIDs.
> > This is why the TransactionID type size increases from 4 to 8 bytes.
> > It also has an effect on the proc array, allowing two transactions that
> > that are more than 2 billion XIDs apart to run at the same time.
>
> Well, what three committers are telling you is that this approach has
> zero chance of being accepted.
>
> Now, of course, none of us have any control over what you or anyone
> else chooses to submit. It's perfectly possible to keep submitting
> this patch set with this design choice. But I do not think anyone will
> ever commit it, and if by chance someone did, there would be an
> immediate outcry and it would certainly end up getting reverted. This
> is kind of what I meant in my earlier message when I said this:

I think we need to go even farther backward in the discussion --- are we
designing a system for a pure API, or one which considers tradeoffs
between design and code changes? Are we designing for the general
use-case or high volume installs? You get different outcomes if people
make different decisions on the above issues.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com

Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Paquier 2026-02-13 03:18:32 Re: Fix wrong log in pgstat_report_checksum_failures_in_db()
Previous Message John Naylor 2026-02-13 02:32:29 Re: tuple radix sort