Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XxxA8-00083f-NZ for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 08 Dec 2014 12:11:36 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XxxA7-00076h-DX for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 08 Dec 2014 12:11:35 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1XxxA6-00076Z-HC for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 08 Dec 2014 12:11:34 +0000 Received: from tama500.ecl.ntt.co.jp ([129.60.39.148]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1Xxx9z-0005IR-UC for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 08 Dec 2014 12:11:32 +0000 Received: from vc1.ecl.ntt.co.jp (vc1.ecl.ntt.co.jp [129.60.86.153]) by tama500.ecl.ntt.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sB8CBIia030690; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:11:18 +0900 Received: from vc1.ecl.ntt.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vc1.ecl.ntt.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D5F5F590; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:11:18 +0900 (JST) Received: from imail3.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp (imail3.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp [129.60.5.248]) by vc1.ecl.ntt.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 562555F55A; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:11:18 +0900 (JST) Received: from [129.60.241.75] ([129.60.241.75]) by imail3.m.ecl.ntt.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sB8CBIpH008474; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:11:18 +0900 Message-ID: <5485953D.6080306@lab.ntt.co.jp> Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 21:10:37 +0900 From: Etsuro Fujita User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.0; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ashutosh Bapat , Noah Misch CC: Kyotaro HORIGUCHI , Heikki Linnakangas , Shigeru Hanada , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: inherit support for foreign tables References: <54645499.7050709@lab.ntt.co.jp> <5476FB4B.9060705@lab.ntt.co.jp> <547D2B1D.1080107@lab.ntt.co.jp> <547FD69A.8090308@lab.ntt.co.jp> <20141206155144.GB1689818@tornado.leadboat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-hackers Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org (2014/12/08 15:17), Ashutosh Bapat wrote: > On Sat, Dec 6, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Noah Misch > wrote: > Does this inheritance patch add any > atomicity > problem that goes away when one breaks up the inheritance hierarchy and > UPDATEs each table separately? If not, this limitation is okay. > If the UPDATES crafted after breaking up the inheritance hierarchy are > needed to be run within the same transaction (as the UPDATE on > inheritance hierarchy would do), yes, there is atomicity problem. ISTM that your concern would basically a known problem. Consider the following transaction. BEGIN TRANSACTION; UPDATE foo SET a = 100; -- updates on table foo in remote server1 UPDATE bar SET a = 100; -- updates on table bar in remote server2 COMMIT TRANSACTION; This transaction would cause the atomicity problem if pgfdw_xact_callback() for XACT_EVENT_PRE_COMMIT for foo succeeded and then that for bar failed during CommitTransaction(). Thanks, Best regards, Etsuro Fujita -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers