Horton

Re: Something is wrong with wal_compression

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Andrey Borodin <amborodin86@gmail.com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2023-01-27T03:22:25Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 3:04 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I think we need to get the thing correct first and worry about
>> performance later.  What's wrong with simply making pg_xact_status
>> write and flush a record of the XID's existence before returning it?
>> Yeah, it will cost you if you use that function, but not if you don't.

> It would be pg_current_xact_id() that would have to pay the cost of
> the WAL flush, not pg_xact_status() itself,

Right, typo on my part.

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Remove recovery test 011_crash_recovery.pl

  2. Add a txid_status function.