From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de> |
Subject: | Re: synchronized snapshots |
Date: | 2011-08-15 08:07:31 |
Message-ID: | 1432128.baSlv4axZa@alap2 |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Monday, August 15, 2011 08:40:34 Simon Riggs wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de> wrote:
> > In short, this is how it works:
> >
> > SELECT pg_export_snapshot();
> > pg_export_snapshot
> > --------------------
> > 000003A1-1
> > (1 row)
> >
> >
> > (and then in a different session)
> >
> > BEGIN TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL REPEATABLE READ (SNAPSHOT =
> > '000003A1-1');
> I don't see the need to change the BEGIN command, which is SQL
> Standard. We don't normally do that.
Uhm. There already are several extensions to begin transaction. Like the just
added "DEFERRABLE".
> If we have pg_export_snapshot() why not pg_import_snapshot() as well?
Using BEGIN has the advantage of making it explicit that it cannot be used
inside an existing transaction. Which I do find advantageous.
Andres
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jun Ishiduka | 2011-08-15 08:46:53 | Re: Online base backup from the hot-standby |
Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2011-08-15 07:51:42 | Re: synchronized snapshots |