On 19.12.2010 20:57, Florian Pflug wrote:
> If we reuse the legacy field xvac to store xlast, we don't get into
> trouble with binary upgrades either. We' need to find a way to deal
> with tuples where HEAP_MOVED_IN or HEAP_MOVED_OUT is set, but that
> seems manageable..
xvac shares the field with command id, and cid is in use while the tuple
is being updated.
-- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com