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: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@gmail.com>, Andrey Borodin <amborodin86@gmail.com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2023-01-28T03:39:56Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2023-01-28 11:38:50 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> FWIW, my vote goes for a more expensive but reliable function even in
>> stable branches.

> I very strenuously object. If we make txid_current() (by way of
> pg_current_xact_id()) flush WAL, we'll cause outages.

What are you using it for, that you don't care whether the answer
is trustworthy?

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Remove recovery test 011_crash_recovery.pl

  2. Add a txid_status function.