Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Thomas Munro
Тема Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?
Дата
Msg-id CA+hUKGKAtuJsqEMMc6VASgD=YtkM-BUqJYgZi6DAOknaBfT5Ag@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?  (Mark Dilger <hornschnorter@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Should we add xid_current() or a int8->xid cast?
Список pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 6:56 AM Mark Dilger <hornschnorter@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/30/19 5:14 PM, Thomas Munro wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 12:22 PM Mark Dilger <hornschnorter@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> These two patches (v3) no longer apply cleanly.  Could you please
> >> rebase?
> >
> > Hi Mark,
> > Thanks.  Here's v4.
>
> Thanks, Thomas.
>
> The new patches apply cleanly and pass 'installcheck'.

I rebased, fixed the "xid_snapshot_xip" problem spotted by Takao Fujii
that I had missed earlier, updated a couple of error messages to refer
to the new names (even when using the old functions) and ran
check-world and some simple manual tests on an -m32 build just to be
paranoid.  Here are the versions of these patches I'd like to commit.
Does anyone want to object to the txid/xid8 type punning scheme or
long term txid-sunsetting plan?

Вложения

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Kyotaro Horiguchi
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: pause recovery if pitr target not reached
Следующее
От: Michael Paquier
Дата:
Сообщение: Some incorrect option sizes for PQconninfoOption in libpq