Re: now() vs transaction_timestamp()
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: now() vs transaction_timestamp() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFj8pRB_e81nwbDQ-=MwFkNDqZOukXZNWXVW12ZUVYpuEaPatw@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: now() vs transaction_timestamp() (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
so 6. 10. 2018 v 13:47 odesílatel Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> napsal:
On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 2:55 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> My initial thought was that we should just re-mark transaction_timestamp()
> as parallel-restricted and call it a day, but we'd then have to do the
> same for SQLValueFunction, which is not much fun because it does have
> variants that are parallel safe (and teaching max_parallel_hazard_walker
> which is which seems like a recipe for bugs).
>
> Also, while it might not be quite too late to force a catversion bump
> in v11, this is demonstrably also broken in v10, and we can't do that
> there.
>
> So maybe the right answer is to change the parallel mode infrastructure
> so it transmits xactStartTimestamp, making transaction_timestamp()
> retroactively safe, and then in HEAD only we could re-mark now() as
> safe. We might as well do the same for statement_timestamp as well.
>
+1. Sounds like a reasonable way to fix the problem. I can take care
of it (though not immediately) if you want.
+1
Pavel
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: