Horton

Thread

Commits

  1. Remove long-unused TransactionIdIsActive()

  2. Fix race condition in preparing a transaction for two-phase commit.

  1. TransactionIdIsActive() has long been unused

    Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> — 2025-07-09T18:34:57Z

    Hi,

While looking at Tomas' NUMA patchset I got curious what we use
TransactionIdIsActive() for (it's modified in the patchset). Turns out we
don't. And haven't for a long while, the last use was removed in

commit bb38fb0d43c
Author: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@iki.fi>
Date:   2014-05-15 16:37:50 +0300

    Fix race condition in preparing a transaction for two-phase commit.

Seems like we should just remove TransactionIdIsActive()?

Greetings,

Andres Freund

  2. Re: TransactionIdIsActive() has long been unused

    Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> — 2025-07-09T19:46:43Z

    Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> Seems like we should just remove TransactionIdIsActive()?

+1.  I wondered if any extensions might depend on it, but
could not find any trace of that in Debian code search.
And it's a sufficiently odd test (as noted in its comments)
that one could debate whether using it for an extension's
purposes would be correct anyway.

			regards, tom lane

  3. Re: TransactionIdIsActive() has long been unused

    Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2025-07-10T00:52:45Z

    On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 03:46:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
>> Seems like we should just remove TransactionIdIsActive()?
> 
> +1.  I wondered if any extensions might depend on it, but
> could not find any trace of that in Debian code search.
> And it's a sufficiently odd test (as noted in its comments)
> that one could debate whether using it for an extension's
> purposes would be correct anyway.

+1.
--
Michael

  4. Re: TransactionIdIsActive() has long been unused

    Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> — 2025-07-12T15:20:21Z

    Hi,

On 2025-07-10 09:52:45 +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2025 at 03:46:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> >> Seems like we should just remove TransactionIdIsActive()?
> > 
> > +1.  I wondered if any extensions might depend on it, but
> > could not find any trace of that in Debian code search.
> > And it's a sufficiently odd test (as noted in its comments)
> > that one could debate whether using it for an extension's
> > purposes would be correct anyway.
> 
> +1.

Great. Thanks for checking Tom, Michael.  Pushed.

Greetings,

Andres Freund