Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
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  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения


On 2 Feb. 2017 08:32, "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> Also, including the GID in the WAL for each COMMIT/ABORT PREPARED
> doesn't seem inordinately expensive to me.

I'm confused ... isn't it there already?  If not, how do we handle
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:

Предыдущее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Patch: Write Amplification Reduction Method (WARM)
Следующее
От: Robert Haas
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Make psql's \set display variablesin alphabetical order.