Skip site navigation (1)
Skip section navigation (2)
Peripheral Links
Header And Logo
|
Site Navigation
Re: Questions related to xlog
- From: Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>
- To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
- Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
- Subject: Re: Questions related to xlog
- Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2005 18:00:37 -0500 (EST)
- Message-id: <Pine(dot)LNX(dot)4(dot)58(dot)0512231759220(dot)23255(at)eon(dot)cs>
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005, Tom Lane wrote: > > Yeah, the non-transaction-controlled distinction is really not very > useful. I believe Vadim put it in originally because he wanted to go to > a REDO/UNDO approach, in which it would've been important to tell the > difference, but we never did that (and probably never will). I've > preserved the distinction because it seemed worthwhile from the > standpoint of documentation and logical clarity, but if you see a reason > to get rid of it, I won't argue hard for it. > No strong reasons to remove them, though the comments are kind of confusing. Regards, Qingqing
- References:
- Questions related to xlog
- From: Qingqing Zhou
- Re: Questions related to xlog
- From: Tom Lane
- Questions related to xlog
- Prev by Date: Re: Questions related to xlog
- Next by Date: PLs and domain constraints
- Previous by thread: Re: Questions related to xlog
- Next by thread: PLs and domain constraints
- Indexes: