Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
| От | Craig Ringer |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAMsr+YEDR3OHhULKa_Xk+JKSvCajSSjgKqzF-EaPKNyUDEB9QQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2 Feb. 2017 08:32, "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:I'm confused ... isn't it there already? If not, how do we handle
> Also, including the GID in the WAL for each COMMIT/ABORT PREPARED
> doesn't seem inordinately expensive to me.
reconstructing 2PC state from WAL at all?
Right. Per my comments uothread I don't see why we need to add anything more to WAL here.
Stas was concerned about what happens in logical decoding if we crash between PREPSRE TRANSACTION and COMMIT PREPARED. But we'll always go back and decode the whole txn again anyway so it doesn't matter.
We can just track it on ReorderBufferTxn when we see it at PREPARE TRANSACTION time.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: