On 31/01/14 11:24, Robert Haas wrote:
> > what do you think about the approach the attached patch implements?
> > I'm not really sure if this is what you had in mind, especially if
> > this is the right lock.
> The attached patch seems not to be attached, […]

I'm at FOSDEM right now, I will send it as soon as I'm back home.

> […] but the right lock to use would be the same one
> BackendIdGetProc() is using.  I'd add a new function
> BackendIdGetTransactionIds or something like that.

Good – that's exactly what I did (with a slightly different naming).

> >> I also note that the docs seem to need some copy-editing:
> >>
> >> +     <entry>The current <xref linked="ddl-system-columns">xmin
> >> value.</xref></entry>
> The link shouldn't include the period, and probably should also not
> include the word "value".  I would make only the word "xmin" part of
> the link.

Thanks for elaboration.

Best regards,

 Christian Kruse               http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

Attachment: pgpkstlLLohOH.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to