| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Hot Standby (v9d) |
| Date: | 2009-01-28 20:13:21 |
| Message-ID: | 1233173601.2327.2531.camel@ebony.2ndQuadrant |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 21:41 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> So, you can think of the unobserved xids array as an extension of
> ProcArray. The entries are like light-weight PGPROC entries. In fact I
> proposed earlier to simply create dummy PGPROC entries instead.
Which we don't do because we don't know whether we are dealing with
top-level xids or subtransactions of already observed top-level xids.
Either way we have to rearrange things when we move from unobserved to
observed. A major difference is that what we have now works and what we
might have instead may not, which is being illustrated by recent
testing.
--
Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2009-01-28 20:16:15 | Re: Hot Standby (v9d) |
| Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2009-01-28 20:07:01 | Re: Hot Standby (v9d) |