Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 7:09 AM, Marko Tiikkaja >> Thanks, this one looks good to me. Going to mark this patch as ready for >> committer.
> I don't see any tests with this patch, so I personally won't be the > committer on this just yet. I've already taken it according to the commitfest app. There's a lot of things I don't like stylistically, but they all seem fixable, and I'm working through them now. The only actual bug I've found so far is a race condition while setting MyProc->xmin (you can't do that separately from verifying that the source transaction is still running, else somebody else could see a global xmin that's gone backwards). > Also, not sure why the snapshot id syntax has leading zeroes on first > part of the number, but not on second part. It will still sort > incorrectly if that's what we were trying to achieve. Either leave off > the leading zeroes on first part of add them to second. The first part is of fixed length, the second not so much. I'm not wedded to the syntax but I don't see anything wrong with it either. > I'm also concerned that we are adding this to the BEGIN statement as > the only option. Huh? The last version of the patch has it only as SET TRANSACTION SNAPSHOT, which I think is the right way. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers