Re: [HACKERS] XIDTAG ???

> 
> > On Mon, 3 May 1999, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > > Probably no reason for the transaction id.  I don't remember that being
> > > used at all.
> > 
> > Do you mean that there is no reason for the xid to exist, as it is not
> > used?  If so, then may I humbly request that it be left in for another
> > six months in the hopes of using a transaction processing monitor to
> > distribute postgres across multiple machines safely?  I'll need the xid
> > if and when I start that project, which will be after I finish the
> > TPM.  8^)
> 
> No, I don't recommend removing it, but just not storing it in the lock
> system.  There is no need for it there.

I don't see any urgent reason for removing it. For the moment I would leave
the code as is. A distributed postgres sounds interesting.

-- 
Massimo Dal Zotto

+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Massimo Dal Zotto               email: dz@cs.unitn.it               |
|  Via Marconi, 141                phone: ++39-0461534251              |
|  38057 Pergine Valsugana (TN)      www: http://www.cs.unitn.it/~dz/  |
|  Italy                             pgp: finger dz@tango.cs.unitn.it  |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+