Re: Confused about TransactionIdSetTreeStatus
От | Heikki Linnakangas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Confused about TransactionIdSetTreeStatus |
Дата | |
Msg-id | aa1caae2-0780-89fc-f84b-c265ab44eee4@iki.fi обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Confused about TransactionIdSetTreeStatus (Japin Li <japinli@hotmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 25/10/2022 18:09, Japin Li wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Oct 2022 at 22:46, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote: >> On 25/10/2022 12:02, Japin Li wrote: >>> However, the code marks the main transaction and subtransactions directly >>> to the committed. >> >> Hmm, yeah, step 2 in this example doesn't match reality. We actually >> set t and t1 directly as committed. The explanation above that comment >> is correct, but the example is not. It used to work the way the >> example says, but that was changed in commit >> 06da3c570f21394003fc392d80f54862f7dec19f. Ironically, that commit also >> added the outdated comment. >> >> The correct example would be: >> >> TransactionId t commits and has subxids t1, t2, t3, t4 t is on page >> p1, t1 is also on p1, t2 and t3 are on p2, t4 is on p3 >> 1. update pages2-3: >> page2: set t2,t3 as sub-committed >> page3: set t4 as sub-committed >> 2. update page1: >> page1: set t,t1 as committed, >> 3. update pages2-3: >> page2: set t2,t3 as committed >> page3: set t4 as committed > > Thanks for your explanation. Attach a patch to remove the outdated comment. Applied, thanks! - Heikki
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: