From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: preserving forensic information when we freeze |
Date: | 2013-12-19 10:44:20 |
Message-ID: | 20131219104420.GB1759@alap2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2013-12-18 21:42:25 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 5:54 PM, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> >> if (frz->frzflags & XLH_FREEZE_XVAC)
> >> + {
> >> HeapTupleHeaderSetXvac(tuple, FrozenTransactionId);
> >> + /* If we somehow haven't hinted the tuple previously, do it now. */
> >> + HeapTupleHeaderSetXminCommitted(tuple);
> >> + }
> >
> > What's the reasoning behind adding HeapTupleHeaderSetXminCommitted()
> > here?
>
> I'm just copying the existing logic. See the final stanza of
> heap_prepare_freeze_tuple.
Yes, but why don't you keep that in heap_prepare_freeze_tuple()? Just
because of HeapTupleHeaderSetXminCommitted()? I dislike transporting the
infomask in the wal record and then changing it away from that again afterwards.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Florian Pflug | 2013-12-19 10:57:32 | Re: [PATCH] SQL assertions prototype |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2013-12-19 10:38:42 | Re: clang's -Wmissing-variable-declarations shows some shoddy programming |