public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Amit Kapila <[email protected]>
To: Ajin Cherian <[email protected]>
Cc: Давыдов Виталий <[email protected]>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Slow catchup of 2PC (twophase) transactions on replica in LR
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 11:07:49 +0530
Message-ID: <CAA4eK1+n7M2S1OpoGWDd+YZkDCuURMdVRbvP0eELQUvWgmDneg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFPTHDbU4EkVmKL66i5BzrmQ6LFftQPx_TZ1euKt9fvVzQDyjA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8fab8-65d74c80-1-2f28e880@39088166>
<CAA4eK1KOs3s6syZqUgrd2WvjTz64SGf0ToZcRoPMCKKH+M0YFQ@mail.gmail.com>
<99df2-65d8d200-1-63c26880@172687752>
<CAA4eK1KtjjPxe5tjWeGNf5CfF9qfceVQCCC9XGsKzR-ifQD9uA@mail.gmail.com>
<ba4b6-65ddc580-9-5c3e3080@134362348>
<CAA4eK1J6wOMkDDt3iOs+JqkvQvuwSORosTpqdejgvXqFmxex=A@mail.gmail.com>
<badcf-65dde500-3-24ba3c80@28790566>
<cedbe-65e0c000-1-6db17700@133269862>
<[email protected]>
<f9f1b-65e72c80-7-533dda00@76203995>
<CAFPTHDbU4EkVmKL66i5BzrmQ6LFftQPx_TZ1euKt9fvVzQDyjA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 10:53 AM Ajin Cherian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 1:29 AM Давыдов Виталий <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> In usual work, the subscription has two_phase = on. I have to change this option at catchup stage only, but this parameter can not be altered. There was a patch proposal in past to implement altering of two_phase option, but it was rejected. I think, the recreation of the subscription with two_phase = off will not work.
>>
>>
>
> The altering of two_phase was restricted because if there was a previously prepared transaction on the subscriber when the two_phase was on, and then it was turned off, the apply worker on the subscriber would re-apply the transaction a second time and this might result in an inconsistent replica.
> Here's a patch that allows toggling two_phase option provided that there are no pending uncommitted prepared transactions on the subscriber for that subscription.
>
I think this would probably be better than the current situation but
can we think of a solution to allow toggling the value of two_phase
even when prepared transactions are present? Can you please summarize
the reason for the problems in doing that and the solutions, if any?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
view thread (15+ messages)
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]
Subject: Re: Slow catchup of 2PC (twophase) transactions on replica in LR
In-Reply-To: <CAA4eK1+n7M2S1OpoGWDd+YZkDCuURMdVRbvP0eELQUvWgmDneg@mail.gmail.com>
* 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