On 08/05/2016 01:48 PM, Christian Ohler wrote:
Thanks, fair point. I should have mentioned that I know about triggers but was hoping to find a less invasive mechanism (IIUC, I'd have to install a trigger on every table) – it seems to me that Postgres should just be able to tell me whether COMMIT will do anything, it obviously has to track that somehow (or some approximation of it).

Another thing I should have mentioned is that I don't consider incrementing a sequence to be a modification.


On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Alex Ignatov <a.igna...@postgrespro.ru <mailto:a.igna...@postgrespro.ru>> wrote:

    Hi! Make trigger function

    Alex Ignatov
    Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
    Russian Postgres Company




    On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 10:25 PM +0300, "Christian Ohler"
    <oh...@shift.com <mailto:oh...@shift.com>> wrote:

        Hi,

        I'm trying to find a way to have Postgres tell me if the
        current transaction would modify database if I committed it
        now.  I can live with a conservative approximation (sometimes
        – ideally, rarely – get a "yes" even though nothing would be
        modified, but never get a "no" even though there are pending
        modifications).  It's acceptable (probably even desirable) if
        a no-op write operation like "UPDATE foo SET bar = 1 WHERE bar
        = 1" is considered a modification.

        (The use case is an audit log mechanism vaguely similar to
        pgMemento.)


        This sentence from
        https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/view-pg-locks.html
        <https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/view-pg-locks.html> :

        > If a permanent ID is assigned to the transaction (which
        normally happens
        > only if the transaction changes the state of the database),
        it also holds
        > an exclusive lock on its permanent transaction ID until it ends.

        makes me think that I can perhaps do it as follows:

        SELECT count(*) FROM pg_locks WHERE pid=pg_backend_pid() AND
        locktype='transactionid' AND mode='ExclusiveLock' AND granted;

        Is that right?  "Permanent transaction ID" refers to the XID,
        correct?  Are there other, better ways?  Are there ways to
        avoid false positives due to temp tables?

        Thanks in advance,
        Christian.


What sort of interface are you looking for. Where/When would you grab the information? Do what with it? Log triggers are the typical pattern here (with packages just for that sort of thing).

Reply via email to