On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > I made two more changes: > 1. introduce newestCommitTs. Original code was using lastCommitXact to > check that no "future" transaction is asked for, but this doesn't really > work if a long-running transaction is committed, because asking for > transactions with a higher Xid but which were committed earlier would > raise an error.
I'm kind of disappointed that, in spite of previous review comments, this got committed with extensive use of the CommitTs naming. I think that's confusing, but it's also something that will be awkward if we want to add other data, such as the much-discussed commit LSN, to the facility. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
