Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 20:07:12 +0200
From: Andres Freund <andres@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, s.zuban@gmail.com, pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: BUG #11032: Prepared transactions do not update
 pg_last_xact_replay_timestamp() anymore
Message-ID: <20140728180712.GR17793@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <20140724191127.32089.82261@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
 <20429.1406238373@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20140724215743.GG16857@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <21266.1406241129@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20140724223459.GI16857@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <21620.1406242232@sss.pgh.pa.us> <53D62059.6060304@vmware.com>
 <20140728141757.GN17793@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <53D68F41.40604@vmware.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53D68F41.40604@vmware.com>
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-bugs-owner@postgresql.org

On 2014-07-28 20:58:25 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 07/28/2014 05:17 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
> >On 2014-07-28 13:05:13 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >>We probably should set XLogRecord->xl_xid in COMMIT_/ABORT_PREPARED records
> >>though. It seems weird not to, and it would simplify code that interprets
> >>those records. But I don't think we should back-patch that.
> >
> >I doubt that'd be a net improvement - wouldn't that just make the life
> >of anything tracking xid liveliness a bit more complicated?
> 
> How so?

Nothing super concrete. Doesn't feel entirely right ;): It's imo
confusing if records for the same xid are possibly created by two
different backends and that there suddenly can be an additional WAL
record referring to the xid after it's been prepared.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

-- 
 Andres Freund	                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


-- 
Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs