Re: Improve XLOG_NO_TRAN related comments

[Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>]

Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu> writes:
> On Sat, 24 Dec 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Removing these comments entirely, without changing the code they explain,
>> doesn't strike me as an improvement.

> I just checked if we can remove XLOG_NO_TRAN happily, and the conclusion
> is that it could bring some benefits (though not much) to our system. The
> key is the CheckpointStartLock lock.

Hm.  Perhaps we could keep the current behavior and re-document
XLOG_NO_TRAN as meaning that the xlog record does not involve the
insertion of our XID into permanent storage.

			regards, tom lane