agora inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Konstantin Knizhnik <[email protected]>
To: Tom Lane <[email protected]>
To: Robert Haas <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Craig Ringer <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Cc: Stas Kelvich <[email protected]>
Cc: Simon Riggs <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: logical decoding of two-phase transactions
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 23:15:55 +0300
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
<CANP8+jJ+=hwLcDSNAqBmZwHh0Pb46SERQsBC1i4VCpkgkL9Jjg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CANP8+j+xxYB5GoFebq1NGm17TEAaZ=JvM-Ok-Hp+n6De3pseeA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAMsr+YH0aRgnk8XwyYypV1E10DNXwgGpWTLq_P2MGjACpiwMpA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAMsr+YGX6Q-VNXEhu3sriCf0wCS6hjQ0Lhj4rJ8VueVuuka+fg@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CAMsr+YHos95GFyfd2Gk61-66wpxFTgXJh=sBV3Rtfhe3xzG1HQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAB7nPqQogmPYRkb=wwA4veeAWZXwDXQA64vw7fO_mHuDhAOHoA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAMsr+YHQzGxnR-peT4SbX2-xiG2uApJMTgZ4a3TiRBM6COyfqg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAB7nPqSQPANEwaLm1GU4MYjENrRgetiRCxhWoP-ATQbutWm+Yw@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+TgmoY7sqHfc=tgTPO6695gOF4bykWRO3fnk7bQr+ij5eycew@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
On 02/01/2017 10:32 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <[email protected]> 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?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>
Right now logical decoding ignores prepare and take in account only "commit prepared":
/*
* Currently decoding ignores PREPARE TRANSACTION and will just
* decode the transaction when the COMMIT PREPARED is sent or
* throw away the transaction's contents when a ROLLBACK PREPARED
* is received. In the future we could add code to expose prepared
* transactions in the changestream allowing for a kind of
* distributed 2PC.
*/
For some scenarios it works well, but if we really need prepared state at replica (as in case of multimaster), then it is not enough.
--
Konstantin Knizhnik
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
view thread (17+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: logical decoding of two-phase transactions
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox