On mån, 2012-01-16 at 22:59 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of lun ene 16 12:27:03 -0300 2012: > > > > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes: > > > Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of dom ene 15 10:00:03 -0300 > > > 2012: > > >> On ons, 2011-12-28 at 14:35 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > >>> The trouble with using ReadNewTransactionId is that it makes the results > > >>> volatile, not stable as the function is declared to be. > > > > >> Could we alleviate that problem with some caching within the function? > > > > > Maybe if we have it be invalidated at transaction end, that could work. > > > So each new transaction would get a fresh value. > > > > Yeah, I think that would work. > > So who's going to work on a patch? Peter, are you? If not, we should > add it to the TODO list.
Not at this very moment, but maybe in a few weeks. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
