Simon Riggs writes:
> No need to wait for idle-in-transaction sessions during index builds.
> GetCurrentVirtualXIDs() specifically *includes* backends that have
> proc->xmin == InvalidTransactionId (0), but I'm not sure why.
Applied with the discussed tweaks. I also added some logic to make
Defi
Simon Riggs writes:
> On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 18:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> So on third thought I think the patch logic is sound; but I think that
>> as documentation we had better add another bool parameter to
>> GetCurrentVirtualXIDs indicating whether it's okay to ignore procs
>> with xmin = 0.
On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 18:28 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> So on third thought I think the patch logic is sound; but I think that
> as documentation we had better add another bool parameter to
> GetCurrentVirtualXIDs indicating whether it's okay to ignore procs
> with xmin = 0.
That sounds better thro
Simon Riggs writes:
> However, the basic premise is that idle-in-transaction sessions do not
> need to block index builds.
[ thinks for awhile... ] Actually, I believe that your premise is
correct; the problem is with your proof ;-). Considering only the
xmins is insufficient to prove that this
On Fri, 2009-04-03 at 15:46 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
> > No need to wait for idle-in-transaction sessions during index builds.
> > GetCurrentVirtualXIDs() specifically *includes* backends that have
> > proc->xmin == InvalidTransactionId (0), but I'm not sure why.
>
> On furth
Simon Riggs writes:
> No need to wait for idle-in-transaction sessions during index builds.
> GetCurrentVirtualXIDs() specifically *includes* backends that have
> proc->xmin == InvalidTransactionId (0), but I'm not sure why.
On further consideration, this patch is simply *wrong*, and would still
On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 12:15 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs writes:
> > No need to wait for idle-in-transaction sessions during index builds.
> > GetCurrentVirtualXIDs() specifically *includes* backends that have
> > proc->xmin == InvalidTransactionId (0), but I'm not sure why.
>
> Because
Simon Riggs writes:
> No need to wait for idle-in-transaction sessions during index builds.
> GetCurrentVirtualXIDs() specifically *includes* backends that have
> proc->xmin == InvalidTransactionId (0), but I'm not sure why.
Because they might be about to change xmin to something real?
No need to wait for idle-in-transaction sessions during index builds.
GetCurrentVirtualXIDs() specifically *includes* backends that have
proc->xmin == InvalidTransactionId (0), but I'm not sure why.
$SUBJECT is currently used by DefineIndex() to wait for all backends
that might be able to see ind
