Re: [PATCHES] [PATCH] Provide 8-byte transaction IDs to

From: "Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Jan Wieck" <JanWieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] [PATCH] Provide 8-byte transaction IDs to
Date: 2006-08-21 18:10:10
Message-ID: e51f66da0608211110kda30ed0v417eceb1cbcdf8b5@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On 8/21/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Marko Kreen" <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > On 8/21/06, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> I'm not following the point here. Dump and restore has never intended
> >> to preserve the transaction counter, so why should it preserve
> >> high-order bits of the transaction counter?
>
> > Thus it guarantees that any new issued large txid's will be larger
> > than existing ones in tables. Thus code can depend on monotonous
> > growth.
>
> Within a single installation, sure, but I don't buy that we ought to try
> to preserve XIDs across installations.

I think you are right in the respect that we should not do it
automatically.

But now that the long xids may end up in data tables, user may have the
need dump/restore it in another installation. If the application
is eg. Slony like queue, that depends on xid growth, user needs to
be able to bump epoch or application level support for migration.
If he has neither, he needs basically to extract old contents by hand
(as app would not work reliably) and reset everything.

Probably the right thing would be for application have a functions
"we moved, fix everything". But bumping epoch is such a simple
way of fixing it that it should still be available.

And pg_resetxlog is fine for that. Espacially as using it signals
"It's dangerous what you are doing!"

--
marko

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2006-08-21 18:26:26 Re: [HACKERS] BF Failure on Bandicoot
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-21 18:06:34 Re: PostgreSQL on 64 bit Linux

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2006-08-21 18:26:26 Re: [HACKERS] BF Failure on Bandicoot
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2006-08-21 17:45:54 Re: [HACKERS] proposal - plpgsql: execute using into