Heikki Linnakangas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Actually, I think we should completely separate the namespaces of the
>>> global transaction identifiers, so that you could use the same gid in
>>> two different databases without a conflict.
>>
>> Really? They're supposed to be "global".
> Well yeah, the TM should be assigning globally unique ids to every
> transaction. I don't trust all the TM implementations out there, and you
> could even have two different TMs stepping on each others toes, but then
> again I guess it's not really our problem as long as we give a nice
> error message.
If we did that then it'd foreclose the possibility of committing a
prepared xact from a connection in a different DB. Even though I'm a
bit worried about whether we'd have bugs in doing such a thing, I don't
really want to define it to be impossible. "Not implemented" is a lot
different from "impossible because of bad system design".
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(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
