On Wednesday 26 July 2006 14:27, Darcy Buskermolen wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 July 2006 14:03, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Darcy Buskermolen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >> The question though is if we did that, would Slony actually use it?
> > >
> > > If it made sence to do it, then yes we would do it. The problem ends up
> > > being Slony is designed to work across a multitude of versions of PG,
> > > and unless this was backported to at least 7.4, it would take a while
> > > (ie when we stopped supporting versions older than it was ported into)
> > > before we would make use of it.
> >
> > [ shrug... ]  That's not happening; for one thing the change requires a
> > layout change in pg_control and we have no mechanism to do that without
> > initdb.
> I'll take a bit more of a look through the patch and see if it is a real
> boot to use it on those platforms that support it, and that we have a
> suitable way around it on those that don't.   But at this point I wouldn't
> hold my breath on that

In one of those 3am lightbulbs I belive I have a way to make use of the 64-bit 
XID counter and still maintain the ability to have backwards compatibility.  
Is there any chance you could break this patch up into the 2 separate 
componenets that Hannu mentions, and rework the XID stuff into 
TransactionIdAdvance  as per tom's recommendation.  And in the meantime I'll 
pencil out the slony stuff to utilize this.

> >                     regards, tom lane

Darcy Buskermolen
CommandPrompt, Inc.             
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to