Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump, MVCC and consistency

Martijn van Oosterhout writes: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 02:42:09PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: >> And what about a transaction left open for 2PC? Does a transaction get a >> new XID if it's PREPAREd now and COMMIT PREPAREd in a year? > That I don't know. A prepared transaction is still open for th

Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump, MVCC and consistency

On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 02:42:09PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: > So it seems that, in order for the wraparound to be a problem, the > transaction would have to last longer than 2 billion other transactions. > > And if a transaction did last that long, according to the 8.1 docs (22.1.3): > > "...the

Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump, MVCC and consistency

Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 11:25:00AM -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote: PostgreSQL 8.1 makes checks to avoid data loss due to transaction ID wraparound, but there's one situation I'm not sure how it handles: when a transaction is so long-lived that it would appear to be in t

Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump, MVCC and consistency

Beleive me, when you get data feeds with bad data and you have to do each insert as an xact because copy will just dump out, you can hit 1bil really fast. AlexOn 10/24/05, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 11:25:00AM -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote:> PostgreSQL 8.

Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump, MVCC and consistency

On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 11:25:00AM -0600, Michael Fuhr wrote: > PostgreSQL 8.1 makes checks to avoid data loss due to transaction > ID wraparound, but there's one situation I'm not sure how it handles: > when a transaction is so long-lived that it would appear to be in > the future of newly-created

Re: [GENERAL] pg_dump, MVCC and consistency

On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 02:29:24PM +0200, Florian Ledoux wrote: > If I have well understood, the defaut transaction isolation level in > PG is the "read commited" isolation level. If it is the isolation > scheme used by pg_dump how can I be sure that tables accessed at the > end of my export are co