From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Tatsuo Ishii <ishii@postgresql.org>
Cc: mangoo@wpkg.org
Cc: scott.marlowe@gmail.com
Cc: t-ishii@sra.co.jp
Cc: Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgpool versus sequences
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 20:15:40 -0400
Message-ID: <29868.1306973740@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <27741.1306968830@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <16063.1306811813@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<4DE4A652.2040301@wpkg.org>
<25524.1306848814@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20110601.001430.1098605953350881110.t-ishii@sraoss.co.jp>
<26909.1306965898@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<BANLkTikCRTeZ_g-rDay4RukWOY3Q7irCnQ@mail.gmail.com>
<27741.1306968830@sss.pgh.pa.us>
I wrote:
> Please note also that what pgpool users have got right now is a time
> bomb, which is not better than immediately-visible breakage.
BTW, so far as that goes, I suggest that we tweak nextval() and setval()
to force the sequence tuple's xmax to zero. That will provide a simple
recovery path for anyone who's at risk at the moment. Of course, this
has to go hand-in-hand with the change to forbid SELECT FOR UPDATE,
else those operations would risk breaking active tuple locks.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, ishii@postgresql.org, mangoo@wpkg.org, scott.marlowe@gmail.com, t-ishii@sra.co.jp, Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgpool versus sequences
In-Reply-To: <29868.1306973740@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox