On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> I suspect that there'll be way too much code that relies on stashing
> xact-scoped stuff in globals for that to be viable. Caches alone.
> Peter will be able to explain more, I'm sure.
> We'd probably need a new transaction data object that everything
> xact-scoped hangs off, so we can pass it everywhere or swap it out of
> some global. The mechanical refactoring alone would be pretty scary,
> not to mention the complexity of actually identifying all the less
> obvious places that need changing.
Well this is the converse of the same problem. Today process state and
transaction are tied together. One way or another you're trying to
split that -- either by having two processes share state or by having
one process manage two transactions.
I suppose we already have the infrastructure for parallel query so
there's at least some shared problem space there.
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org)
To make changes to your subscription: