Eric Ridge wrote:
> > Again, you'll probably need to put this low level requirement into
> > context if you want sound advice from this list.
>
> I'm just thinking out lout here, but the context is likely something
> along the lines of externally storing all transaction ids, and
> periodically as
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 9:23 PM, Eric Ridge wrote:
> When sitting inside an extension, and given an arbitrary TransactionId, how
> can you determine that it aborted/crashed *and* that no other active
> transaction thinks it is still running?
>
> I've tried to answer this question myself (against
On 23 October 2017 at 05:44, Eric Ridge wrote:
>> On Oct 22, 2017, at 3:24 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>> Again, you'll probably need to put this low level requirement into
>> context if you want sound advice from this list.
>
> I'm just thinking out lout here, but the context is likely something
> On Oct 22, 2017, at 3:24 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Eric Ridge wrote:
>> I'm looking for the status as any concurrent open transaction might see it.
>> For example, if any concurrent transaction might see it as "in progress",
>> that's what I'd want retu
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Eric Ridge wrote:
> I'm looking for the status as any concurrent open transaction might see it.
> For example, if any concurrent transaction might see it as "in progress",
> that's what I'd want returned. Does that make sense?
Maybe, but note that that's funda
> On Oct 22, 2017, at 2:50 PM, Jaime Casanova
> wrote:
>
> so, what you want is txid_status() [1]... while this is new in v10 you
> can use the code as guide or just migrate to v10 ;)
Oh neat, thanks.
Doesn't that tell you the status relative to the transaction calling
txid_status()?
I
On 22 October 2017 at 15:00, Eric Ridge wrote:
>> On Oct 22, 2017, at 1:50 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Eric Ridge wrote:
>>> Can anyone confirm or deny that this is correct? I feel like it is
>>> correct, but I'm no expert.
>>
>> What are you going to use
> On Oct 22, 2017, at 1:50 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Eric Ridge wrote:
>> Can anyone confirm or deny that this is correct? I feel like it is correct,
>> but I'm no expert.
>
> What are you going to use the code for? I think that that context is
> likely
On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Eric Ridge wrote:
> Can anyone confirm or deny that this is correct? I feel like it is correct,
> but I'm no expert.
What are you going to use the code for? I think that that context is
likely to matter here.
--
Peter Geoghegan
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers ma
When sitting inside an extension, and given an arbitrary TransactionId, how can
you determine that it aborted/crashed *and* that no other active transaction
thinks it is still running?
I've tried to answer this question myself (against the 9.3 sources), and it
seems like it's just:
{
Transa
10 matches
Mail list logo