Re: [HACKERS] Commit timestamp abbreviations

2014-12-24 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Bruce Momjian wrote:
 I noticed this when looking at the allocated shared memory structures in
 head:
 
   shared memory alignment 64-byte of CommitTs Ctl:  0
   shared memory alignment 64-byte of CommitTs shared:  0
 
 I thought we got rid of the idea that 'Ts' means timestamp.  Was this
 part forgotten?

Do you have a specific reference?  That's not the concern I remember,
and I sure don't want to re-read that whole thread again.

-- 
Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training  Services


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] Commit timestamp abbreviations

2014-12-24 Thread Bruce Momjian
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 06:00:21PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
 Bruce Momjian wrote:
  I noticed this when looking at the allocated shared memory structures in
  head:
  
  shared memory alignment 64-byte of CommitTs Ctl:  0
  shared memory alignment 64-byte of CommitTs shared:  0
  
  I thought we got rid of the idea that 'Ts' means timestamp.  Was this
  part forgotten?
 
 Do you have a specific reference?  That's not the concern I remember,
 and I sure don't want to re-read that whole thread again.

I remember the issue of using _ts and 'ts' inconsistently, and I thought
we were going to spell out timestamp in more places, but maybe I am
remembering incorrectly.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  br...@momjian.ushttp://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +


-- 
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers


Re: [HACKERS] Commit timestamp abbreviations

2014-12-24 Thread Petr Jelinek

On 24/12/14 15:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:

On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 06:00:21PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:

Bruce Momjian wrote:

I noticed this when looking at the allocated shared memory structures in
head:

shared memory alignment 64-byte of CommitTs Ctl:  0
shared memory alignment 64-byte of CommitTs shared:  0

I thought we got rid of the idea that 'Ts' means timestamp.  Was this
part forgotten?


Do you have a specific reference?  That's not the concern I remember,
and I sure don't want to re-read that whole thread again.


I remember the issue of using _ts and 'ts' inconsistently, and I thought
we were going to spell out timestamp in more places, but maybe I am
remembering incorrectly.



The change was from committs to commit_ts + CommitTs depending on place.

--
 Petr Jelinek  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training  Services


--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers