On 9/25/07, Jan Wieck <JanWieck at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 9/25/2007 3:23 PM, Marko Kreen wrote:
> > On 9/25/07, Jan Wieck <JanWieck at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On 9/25/2007 1:58 PM, Marko Kreen wrote:
> >> > On 9/25/07, Jan Wieck <JanWieck at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >> txid_lt_snapshot() would then be txid_committed_before(int8, sn) and
> >> >> txid_gt_snapshot() respectively txid_committed_after(int8, sn).

Agh.   I was bit in hurry as missed that you already suggested
better names.

> If you don't like txid_committed_before/after, how about
>
>      txid_visible_in_snapshot(int8,snap)
>      txid_not_visible_in_snapshot(int8,snap)
>
> It's only names of functions that are very likely coded into programs
> rather than used interactively. So the length of the function name
> doesn't really matter.

Now thinking about it, I like 'visible' better than 'committed'
as latter suggest knowledge about transaction result which is
weird, especially for committed_after.

Lets go with txid_visible_in_snapshot() then.


What now?  We should run this thru -hackers too.  I could
even prepare patch for /contrib, to show the code too and maybe
the hell will froze for a moment and this will get into 8.3 ;)

-- 
marko